Recent commentary from National Journal: Media: The Great White Board, by William Powers (November 22, 2000) Before memories of Election Night (and the nets' by and large miserable performance) fade to black, a last look at Tim Russert's low-tech white board and why it was such a hit. Legal Affairs: It's About More Than Which Judge Has the Last Word, by Stuart Taylor Jr. (November 22, 2000) Neither literalism nor originalism nor postmodernism can substitute for the old-fashioned quality called wisdom. The Campaign: Losing the Election Shouldn't Make You a Loser, by Carl M. Cannon (November 22, 2000) The ethos that holds that the winner takes everything and the loser is a fool is a barrier to statesmanship. Political Pulse: It Was All About Sex, by William Schneider (November 15, 2000) Men voted for George W. Bush by a wide margin; Al Gore was the women's choice. Legal Affairs: How Lawyers And Pols Can Get Us Out of This Mess, by Stuart Taylor Jr. (November 15, 2000) Our current predicament illustrates how our legal culture has degraded our political and moral cultures. Media: Amending the Media Constitution, by William Powers (November 15, 2000) The American media universe is supposed to be unjust, but in some ways it has the most ruthless justice of all. The Campaign: Fight or Concede? What Would Martin Sheen Do?, by Carl M. Cannon (November 15, 2000) The fighting spirit of Team Gore has taken on a life of its own. But at what cost? More from National Journal. Discuss this article in the Politics & Society conference of Post & Riposte.

Political Pulse: The Cost of Victory Each candidate has to make a political calculation: how much is winning this election worth? by William Schneider November 22, 2000 The voters have spoken. But what did they say? Look at the results. A near tie in the national popular vote, with Gore leading by less than one-fourth of 1 percent of the total. A close call in the electoral vote, with each candidate shy of a 270-vote majority (as the mess in Florida was being sorted out). A narrow Republican majority in the House. A Senate that could be split 50-50. An election so close creates the impression that voters are deeply polarized. Look at the regional division of the vote. West Coast states and urban industrial states in the Northeast and Midwest went solidly for Gore. Bush swept the Southern, Farm Belt, and Mountain states. The electoral map makes it look as if the country is on the verge of a political civil war. But a close vote can also mean something else -- namely, that voters can't make up their minds. Pollsters know that when a poll question receives a 50-50 response, it can mean that people are sharply divided. It can also mean that voters have mixed feelings and that many are picking an answer at random, which is more often the case. In a network exit poll on Election Day, about one-third of voters said Gore was the candidate who reflected their view of government. One-third said Bush. And one-third saw no difference between the two candidates. That is not a polarized electorate. The candidates seemed to understand that -- at first. "Despite the fact that Joe [Lieberman] and I won the popular vote, it is the winner of the Electoral College that will be the next President," Al Gore said the day after the election. George W. Bush promised, "Dick Cheney and I will do everything in our power to bring people together after one of the most exciting races in our history." Almost immediately, however, the situation deteriorated, and the country seemed on the verge of a free-for-all. The Democrats made threats. "We will be working with voters from Florida in support of legal actions ... to make sure that the people's choice becomes our President," Gore campaign manager William M. Daley said on Nov. 9. The Republicans actually took legal action, seeking a court order to block a manual count of disputed ballots in four Florida counties. They also prepared a scorched-earth strategy to demand recounts in Iowa, Oregon, and Wisconsin, where Gore holds narrow leads. Each candidate has confirmed the most damaging stereotype of himself from the campaign. Bush appeared smug and arrogant as his campaign talked about victory rallies and transition teams. Gore looked like a man who would do anything to get elected as his campaign talked about ballot technicalities and legal challenges. Signs of polarization became increasingly visible in the electorate. Last weekend, the Gallup Poll asked Americans whether they favored or opposed a manual recount in certain Florida counties, which the Gore campaign has requested. Among Gore voters, 85 percent said they favored a manual recount, while 78 percent of Bush voters were opposed. A Time magazine poll taken on Nov. 10 asked Americans whether they thought the residents of Palm Beach County, Fla., where there was some voter confusion over the ballot, should be allowed to vote again. About 80 percent of Gore voters said yes; 84 percent of Bush voters said no. Gallup went on to ask, Should Gore concede if Bush ends up with more votes in Florida after the recount is completed and the overseas ballots are counted? Bush voters said "concede" almost unanimously (94 percent), while two-thirds of Gore supporters wanted their man to hold out. So far, the polarization has not gotten out of hand. Gallup asked, "If Al Gore is declared the winner and inaugurated ... would you accept him as the legitimate President?" Eighty-two percent of Americans said yes, including 66 percent of Bush voters. When the same question was asked about Bush, 79 percent of Americans said they would accept him as the legitimate President, including 61 percent of Gore voters. Still, it's troubling that one-third of each candidate's supporters said they would not accept the opposing candidate as a legitimate President. No vote count is ever going to be 100 percent accurate. Irregularities will persist. Problems such as voter confusion over the Palm Beach County ballot are unfortunate, but there is no simple or fair remedy. What is the legitimacy of having a revote in one county when the voters there know something they didn't know on Election Day, namely, how the rest of the country voted? In the end, the votes must be counted as they were cast. Each candidate has to make a political calculation: How much is winning this election worth? Is it worth creating a constitutional crisis? Is it worth undermining your ability to lead the nation? Those things are at stake if the candidates push this too far. Once the Florida results are in, the endgame for this election will probably require the intervention of an outside force. Who that would be depends upon which candidate is leading. If Bush is ahead, only President Clinton has the standing among Democrats to step in and say: "The votes have been counted and the maneuvering must end. It's over." If Gore is leading, that responsibility falls either to the GOP candidate, or to the only person with comparable standing among Republicans: former President Bush. What do you think? Discuss this article in the Politics & Society conference of Post & Riposte. More from National Journal. More on politics and society in Atlantic Unbound and The Atlantic Monthly. William Schneider is the Cable News Network's senior political analyst. He is also a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., and a contributing editor for the Los Angeles Times, National Journal, and The Atlantic Monthly. His column appears every week in National Journal, a weekly magazine covering politics and government published in Washington, D.C. For information on National Journal Group publications, see NationalJournal.com. All material copyright © 2000 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.