What's the real story behind the 2000 presidential election fiasco? Hanging Chads presents candid and insightful interviews with key figures in the post-election recount in Florida, which decided whether Al Gore or George W. Bush would win the closest presidential contest ever. The book features an introduction that clearly explains the often complex and convoluted legal manoeuvering that occurred during those tense thirty-six days of the recount, a timeline laying out the sequence of events, a cast of characters that identifies the key players on both sides, and a glossary of the court cases and legal terminology that came into play. Pleasants interviews the two main Florida lawyers, Dexter Douglass for Gore and Barry Richard for Bush, and discusses the decision-making process with three judges involved in key cases. The book includes the viewpoint of the press and key political players like Tom Feeney, the Florida legislature's Speaker of the House, and Mac Stipanovich, a key political advisor to Katherine Harris. In addition, Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections Theresa LePore explains why she chose the infamous butterfly ballot that sent the whole process into motion. Providing a unique and balanced insiders' view of one of the most important events in recent history, Hanging Chads is a must-have for students and historians of American politics.

Maddy Sommers, having been raised by physically and mentally abusive parents, found her spirit and world outlook through the love of her beloved aunts and uncle. Throughout her life, she bore the torturous scars of her past abuse. She loathed those that she considered to be bullies and took it upon herself to right perceived wrongs, and she managed to do so in rather creative and messy ways. As she was exacting her brand of justice upon abusive mates who crossed her path, she was simultaneously seeking true love in her own awkward way. Her search for her personal prince was sometimes humorous and other times tragic. Let us just say that she was a romantically hopeful young lady with a massive chip on her shoulder, and those who crossed her would soon learn that they would have been advised to be “cool with Maddy.”

John Fund explores the real divide the country faces with the looming election. Through wary thoughts on voting integrity, he shows how eletions can be decided by the votes of dead people, illegal felon voters, and absentee voters that simply don't exist. If nothing is done to address the growing cynicism about vote counting, rest assured that another close presidential election that descends into bitter partisan wrangling is just around the corner.

"... what really happened in the 'post-election' of 2000."--Dust jacket.

The most complete, accurate, and up-to-date analysis of the events surrounding the Supreme Court's controversial 5-4 decision that stopped the Florida recount and gave George W. Bush a mere five electoral vote victory over Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election.

"With universal appeal (everyone poops, after all), this witty, illustrated description of over two dozen dookies (each with a medical explanation written by a doctor) details what one can learn about health and well-being by studying what's in the bowl. A floater? It's probably due to a buildup of gas. Now think back on last night's dinner, a burrito perhaps? . . .All the greatest hits are here: The Log Jam, The Glass Shard, The Deja Poo, The Hanging Chad ... the list goes on. Sidebars, trivia, over 60 euphemisms for number 2, and unusual case histories all make this the ultimate bathroom reader. Who knew you could learn so much from your poo?"--Publisher website (October 2007)

The 2000 Presidential election ended in a collision of history, law, and the courts. It produced a deadlock that dragged out the result for over a month, and consequences--real and imagined--that promise to drag on for years. In the first in-depth study of the election and its litigious aftermath, Judge Posner surveys the history and theory of American electoral law and practice, analyzes which Presidential candidate ''really'' won the popular vote in Florida, surveys the litigation that ensued, evaluates the courts, the lawyers, and the commentators, and ends with a blueprint for reforming our Presidential electoral practices. The book starts with an overview of the electoral process, including its history and guiding theories. It looks next at the Florida election itself, exploring which candidate ''really'' won and whether this is even a meaningful question. The focus then shifts to the complex litigation, both state and federal, provoked by the photo finish. On the basis of the pragmatic jurisprudence that Judge Posner has articulated and defended in his previous writings, this book offers an alternative justification for the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore while praising the Court for averting the chaotic consequences of an unresolved deadlock. Posner also evaluates the performance of the lawyers who conducted the post-election litigation and of the academics who commented on the unfolding drama. He argues that neither Gore's nor Bush's lawyers blundered seriously, but that the reaction of the legal professoriat to the litigation exposed serious flaws in the academic practice of constitutional law. While rejecting such radical moves as abolishing the Electoral College or creating a national ballot, Posner concludes with a detailed plan of feasible reforms designed to avoid a repetition of the 2000 election fiasco. Lawyers, political scientists, pundits, and politicians are waiting to hear what Judge Posner has to say. But this book is written for and will be welcomed by all who were riveted by the recent crisis of presidential succession.