A dispatch from Washington in the "Counting the Vote" section of this morning's New York Times runs under the headline, "What the House and Senate Could Do, or Not Do, in Picking the President." Discussing the prospect that the presidential election will be decided by Congress, the article says, "In the temper of the times, it is quite likely that no one in Congress will break party ranks." Later on the article says, "Whatever the Constitution, whatever the law and whatever the logic, the prevailing view around Congress is that this kind of dispute would be dealt with in purely partisan terms -- the Republicans backing Mr. Bush and the Democrats Mr. Gore. That is simply how Congress operates these days."
Readers should beware when they read vague phrases like "it is quite likely" and "the prevailing view around Congress." In this case, the "quite likely" scenario offered up by this Times story is flat-out contradicted by another article in today's Times. That article reports that George W. Bush "had called Representative Gene Taylor of Mississippi, a Democrat who was quoted in news reports as saying that if the election were thrown to the House, he would support Mr. Bush." In addition, an article in yesterday's New York Post reported that Rep. Connie Morella, a Republican from Maryland, would support Gore if the election were thrown to the House.
So, far from it being "quite likely that no one in Congress will break party ranks," two members of Congress have already announced their intention to break party ranks. One of those cases was mentioned in another article in today's New York Times. As Smartertimes.com has wondered before, does anyone read all these articles before they go in the paper to try to make sure they don't contradict each other?
Math Problem: A news article on the front page of this morning's New York Times reports on an order by a Florida judge to move to Tallahassee every ballot cast in Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties. The article first refers to "1.1 million ballots," and it does so again later in the story. At another point, however, it refers to 462,000 Palm Beach County ballots and 654,000 Miami-Dade County Ballots. And at another point, the article refers to "all 1.16 million ballots." If the totals for the two individual counties are correct, they add up to 1,116,000. If the Times wants to round this off to 1.1 million, it's a little bit lax for Smartertimes.com's taste, but we wouldn't complain about it. But 1.116 million is not the same as 1.16 million. To refer, as the Times does, to "1.16 million ballots" mysteriously introduces another 44,000 ballots in an election where the margin of victory is in the hundreds.
Note: Smartertimes.com is in Washington this morning and operating off the Washington Final edition.