Angelika America still does not have a new president. In Germany, you are surely observing this election thriller while shaking your head and perhaps with a bit of schadenfreude, because it is indeed fascinating that a country that always prides itself on being a leader in this and that cannot manage to count votes accurately. Although the German press has reported extensively on the presidential election, I would still like to add a few details, as some classic American phenomena are emerging.

First of all, there is the highly complicated and yet quite old-fashioned seeming election process. The American President is not elected directly by the people, but by a body of electors known as the "Electoral College." Each American state sends electors to this body. A candidate needs at least 270 out of a total of 538 electoral votes to become President. However, not every state is allocated the same number of electors. The more populous the state, the more electors it sends. For example, California is one of the most populous states and therefore sends 54 electors, whereas Hawaii sends only 4. The election on November 7th was therefore intended to determine the composition of the group of electors. Generally, the candidate who wins in a particular state (known as the "popular vote") receives all of that state's electoral votes. Winning at this stage does not require an absolute majority; even a lead of a handful of votes is enough to secure all the electoral votes. This is why Florida is currently the deciding factor. Without Florida's electoral votes, neither Bush nor Gore can achieve an absolute majority in the Electoral College. The electors are usually long-standing, loyal party members to ensure they do not vote against the will of the people. What seems bizarre about this system is that a candidate can have more total votes nationwide than their opponent but still receive fewer electoral votes. This is already the case in this election, as Al Gore has secured the "popular vote" (votes cast nationwide). Nevertheless, Bush is likely to become President.

The Electoral College is set to convene on December 18 to elect the president. The official inauguration will then take place on January 20. By the way, the Electoral College system dates back to 1787 and was intended, among other things, to ensure that the states have sufficient say. Numerous attempts have been made to modify the Electoral College system, but so far without success. We can only hope that after this election disaster, something will finally happen. Some critics already suggest that it might not be necessary to change the electoral system, but that it might help to acquire more modern counting machines. In Germany, you might wonder how it is possible that not every state uses the same technology in a presidential election. This is again due to the principle that each state has extensive decision-making freedom. For example, not only is the death penalty present in some states in America and not in others, but there are also different technologies for counting votes and different ballots. These can vary not only from state to state but also from district to district. As a result, some Americans make crosses, others draw black lines in a designated field, and still others punch holes. For this, the ballots are clamped into a device, and you receive a pen-like tool to punch out a pre-drawn hole--next to the name of your preferred candidate. This voting method led to chaos in Florida. Where a hole is punched, there is circular confetti waste, called "chad" in America.

Unfortunately, this is apparently not so simple, because sometimes this punched-out waste still hangs by a thread on the ballot card. The counting machine then doesn't understand what's going on and rejects the ballot as invalid. Therefore, hand counting in Florida should provide more accurate results. The question that went around the country was: What counts as a valid vote? Thus, the "chads" were also categorized. My two favorites are: "pregnant chads," the waste pieces that have barely detached from the card, and "dimpled chads," where only a bulge is visible. However, since there are unfortunately no uniform guidelines for hand counting in Florida either, experts were seen arguing about "chads" on every TV channel - a perfect absurd theater.

Although the results of the counts (including the highly controversial hand counts) were announced in Florida at 5 PM local time last Sunday (November 26), this does not necessarily mean that the winner of the 25 electoral votes in Florida, George Bush, will remain the winner, as numerous lawsuits are still pending in various American courts.

What is crucial now, above all, is what the American "Supreme Court" (similar to the Federal Constitutional Court in Germany) will decide in the coming days. The question is whether the highest court in Florida was authorized to allow manual recounts in Florida beyond the deadline set in the election law. George Bush says the judges in Florida exceeded their authority. Al Gore, on the other hand, believes that everything was done correctly, as no voter's voice should be disregarded.

Incidentally, it is sensational that for the first time in U.S. history, the Supreme Court in Washington is intervening in an election. Americans firmly believe in the sovereignty of individual states, as previously mentioned, and election laws are, even in presidential elections, a matter for the states, and in this particular case, Florida. However, a decision by the Supreme Court in favor of Bush can only increase his lead. Currently, Bush is ahead of Gore in Florida by 537 votes. If the hand recounts are declared invalid beyond the deadline, the lead increases to 930 votes, and the legal battle shifts back to Florida. Gore wants to ensure that a hand recount is conducted in a county called "Leon" (a "county" can be compared to a German district) because the counting machines there failed to account for about a thousand ballots. Since this county typically votes Democratic, Al Gore hopes to gain votes through a hand recount and ultimately defeat Bush.

The problem is that time is running out, and the hand recount should have begun already. By December 12, the electors must be definitively appointed so that they can cast their official votes on December 18 and elect the president. But the hand recount can take time. In Florida, the state legislature is already threatening to simply appoint the electors themselves if there is still no proper, official election result by December 12. The problem is that the state legislature in Florida has a Republican majority (the same party to which George Bush belongs) and would thus appoint Republican-leaning electors. Allegedly, this is supposed to be legal, but I find it quite dubious, as the votes of the people in Florida would not be considered at all.

Regarding the media: They behaved very much like the American media on election night, as they did not shy away from spreading reports (in the pursuit of higher ratings) that were based only on vague predictions--and were also completely wrong. For instance, Florida was first called for Al Gore, then for Bush. Only afterward did they report that the result was too close to call and that all votes would need to be counted. Such false reports can indeed influence the election outcome, as, due to the different time zones, polling stations on the West Coast are still open while counting is already underway in other states.

The narrow election result also clearly reflects the state of the nation. None of the candidates really impressed all Americans, and the country seems like a divided nation. The coastal states and those around the Great Lakes (a traditional stronghold of unions) went to the more liberal Gore, who advocates for better social programs, environmental protection, improved healthcare, stricter gun laws, reducing national debt, and more government control (a very sensitive topic in America). Meanwhile, the states in the middle went to the conservative Bush, who promotes tax cuts (especially for the wealthy), the right to bear arms, strengthening the military, voluntary environmental protection, and as little government regulation as possible. I wonder how anyone can be so mentally deranged as to vote for Bush, but I seem to keep forgetting that San Francisco cannot be compared to the rest of the USA. Not only is voter turnout in San Francisco always impressive by American standards (around 80% in this election, compared to about 50% nationwide), but San Francisco leans toward liberal candidates, with many in San Francisco finding Al Gore too backward and most preferring to vote for Ralph Nader of the American Greens. In general, I find it interesting that everyone openly talks about whom they voted for; it is absolutely not a taboo.

Perhaps you are also interested in how the voter registration process works here in the US. There is no mandatory city registration of citizens like In Germany. In San Francisco, for example, you often encounter people in public places or on the subway who are running around with lists that you can sign to register as a voter. Alternatively, authorities like the DMV send out registration forms. Only American citizens who are at least 18 years old are eligible to vote. Those who only have a Green Card or a visa are not allowed to vote. In most American states, convicted felons are also not allowed to vote, and in a few states, this restriction even applies for life, which is quite draconian.

Well, American courts have to decide. This is another one of these American phenomena: suing at every opportunity. I also find it fascinating that a major state crisis hasn't erupted because of this election disaster. There are increasingly voices saying that enough is enough, but no one criticizes the system per se. Even in the greatest chaos, it is repeatedly emphasized how well and democratically everything is going and how grateful people are to live "in the greatest country" in the world. I find that quite strange. The fact that foreign countries are making fun of America is, of course, not mentioned. Be that as it may, it remains exciting...

Michael Finally, finally it's my turn! Regarding today's newsletter quiz question: For which candidate would Angelika have voted if she had been allowed to vote? Haha, just kidding. Regarding the election, I just wanted to add that Figure 2 clearly shows how Republicans and Democrats divide the country: the middle for Bush and the coastal areas for Gore. And although at first glance it looks like Bush won by a landslide in terms of area, it ultimately almost ended in a tie, because the states in the middle of the USA are much less densely populated and therefore have fewer electoral votes.

• More topics you might be interested in:

  	At AOL Headquarters
  	Green Day
  	Wine Recommendations
  	Freedom Of Speech
  	Local Local News
  	Duck Soup
  	Rundbrief Top Product
  	Japanese supermarkets

  
  

• More topics you might be interested in:

  	At AOL Headquarters
  	Green Day
  	Wine Recommendations
  	Freedom Of Speech
  	Local Local News
  	Duck Soup
  	Rundbrief Top Product
  	Japanese supermarkets