Why did the networks wait for Kerry to concede?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 15, 2024, 11:26:52 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Why did the networks wait for Kerry to concede?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why did the networks wait for Kerry to concede?  (Read 9314 times)
Reaganfan
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,236
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 13, 2008, 08:54:17 AM »

The tradition in an election is for a network to call a winner, then the loser concedes. When it was clear President Bush had been re-elected, with Nevada going for Bush...why did they wait until Kerry conceded to call it?

Was it because they knew if they called it, then Bush topped 270? Isn't that what is supposed to happen?
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,846


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 13, 2008, 11:03:53 AM »

They were being cautious IIRC. There had been murmurs of a request for a re-count in Ohio etc, but as the margin proved too high Kerry eventually conceded.
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 13, 2008, 11:22:04 AM »

Everything in 2004 was ultra-cautious because of the mess the media caused in 2000. I remember how they waited long after polls closed even to call very non-competitive states like South Carolina.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,562
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 13, 2008, 03:09:59 PM »

because they're all communist hacks.  since that's what you're so obviously getting at, Naso.  just say it.  you'll feel better.
Logged
auburntiger
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,233
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.61, S: 0.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2008, 03:36:32 PM »

Partly cautious. Every network didn't call Florida for Bush until it was 98% reporting when he was 5 points ahead.
Logged
DWPerry
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,674
Puerto Rico


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2008, 03:22:01 AM »

I think they should wait until the Electors actually cast the official ballots.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 14, 2010, 04:06:16 PM »

I guess because they wanted to avoid a repeat of Florida 2000.
Logged
21st Century Independent
Rookie
**
Posts: 120


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 03, 2010, 06:07:19 AM »

The majority of the networks wanted Kerry over Bush. They were hoping deep down inside that Kerry would get close enough in Ohio, get a recount and pull it out.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 05, 2010, 01:41:06 AM »

The majority of the networks wanted Kerry over Bush. They were hoping deep down inside that Kerry would get close enough in Ohio, get a recount and pull it out.

I thought the media was biased in favor of Bush Jr. in both 2000 and 2004.
Logged
Sasquatch
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,077


Political Matrix
E: -8.13, S: -8.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 05, 2010, 04:19:24 AM »

The majority of the networks wanted Kerry over Bush. They were hoping deep down inside that Kerry would get close enough in Ohio, get a recount and pull it out.

I thought the media was biased in favor of Bush Jr. in both 2000 and 2004.
+1
Logged
Vepres
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,032
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: April 13, 2010, 10:10:58 PM »

They were paranoid about another 2000-esque screw up.
Logged
Mr.Phips
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,545


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: April 13, 2010, 11:34:09 PM »

Because it wasnt 100% clear until well into Wednesday that Kerry wasnt going to win Ohio.  There was still something of a chance that Kerry could click into the lead there as those heavily Democratic Cleveland precincts were the ones outstanding.  This actually happened in Ohio in 1976 where it looked as if Ford had won well into Wednesday morning only to be overwhelmed by those late Cleveland precincts. 
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2010, 04:08:55 PM »

They wanted to rain on Bush's parade and make him give his victory speech at 3 in the afternoon when ppl couldn't watch. Just another way to snub the president of the free land.
Logged
sg0508
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,056
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 15, 2010, 11:37:53 PM »

Because it wasnt 100% clear until well into Wednesday that Kerry wasnt going to win Ohio.  There was still something of a chance that Kerry could click into the lead there as those heavily Democratic Cleveland precincts were the ones outstanding.  This actually happened in Ohio in 1976 where it looked as if Ford had won well into Wednesday morning only to be overwhelmed by those late Cleveland precincts. 
Hawaii was the winning state in 1976 for Carter and the state was called around 2am I think.  OH was already in the bag.  The only reason Ford was close in OH was because of McCarthy.  Ford made a heck of a rally, but it wasn't enough.
Logged
cpeeks
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 699
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 16, 2010, 05:54:05 PM »

Geez it was Ohio not Hawaii, Hawaii has voted for the democrats in every election since 1960 except in 1972 , and 1984, and Carter beat Ford by 57 electoral votes can you please explain to me how those 4 votes decided the 1976 presidentail election?
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2010, 11:26:26 PM »

Geez it was Ohio not Hawaii, Hawaii has voted for the democrats in every election since 1960 except in 1972 , and 1984, and Carter beat Ford by 57 electoral votes can you please explain to me how those 4 votes decided the 1976 presidentail election?

I think he's saying OH and HI combined would have flipped the 1976 election to Ford.
Logged
Eleden
oaksmarts
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 595


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2010, 11:38:03 PM »
« Edited: May 16, 2010, 11:40:55 PM by Eleden »

Geez it was Ohio not Hawaii, Hawaii has voted for the democrats in every election since 1960 except in 1972 , and 1984, and Carter beat Ford by 57 electoral votes can you please explain to me how those 4 votes decided the 1976 presidentail election?

Hawaii didn't decide the election, but when it was called it pushed Carter past 270 when the networks were reporting the results.  Keep in mind not all of the states had clear winners yet, so while Carter did eventually win by 57 electoral votes when all of the results came in; only 266 of his eventual 297 had actually been placed into his column before Hawaii was called.  

It actually depended on the network.  For example NBC declared Carter the winner when they announced that he had carried the state of Mississippi.  ABC declared Carter the winner when they were able to call Wisconsin and Hawaii for Carter.  
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.042 seconds with 13 queries.