Rating: 
Summary: Awesome!!!!!
Review: A quick scan through the reviews of this book claim that Toobin "bellows" about racism (he actually spent two paragraphs on the issue, and acknowledges that it was not NEARLY as significant as many Gore supporters would claim), unfairly bashes Katherine Harris (even Fox News portrayed her as a dolt, so Toobin is not alone here), and that he generalizes about those involved (he actually details personalities of several individuals of both sides, and his generalizations are limited to his descriptions of groups of hundreds - ie "the Gore campaign).That said, this is not an unbiased book. Toobin unquestionably sympathizes with the Gore campaign, and seems to almost root for them. This does not, however, alter his in-depth and accurate reporting of the basic facts of the case, which are laid out clearly and simply, providing a very easy and fun read. He does tend to editorialize, and doubtlessly, the charges against the Bush campaign (that their hypocrites, amorale, and underhanded) are serious compared to those he levels against the Gore campaign (too compromised by their sense of fair play and their desire for positive media attention). However, this does tend to come across as a kind of admiration for the complete devotion of the Bush soldiers, the intelligence of James Baker, and the tenacity of their lawyers. Overall, this should not be construed as a strictly journalistic work (though it does serve as a good vehicle for learning the facts of the case), but as an entertaining and though-provoking fact-based editorial.
Rating:
Summary: an invaluable entry point
Review: I read Alan Dershowitz' "Supreme Injustice" before reading "Too Close to Call." Big mistake. Toobin's book provides the social history of the election you need to put Dershowitz' arguments--and other accounts of the election--into perspective. Toobin has performed the incredible feat of giving us the facts without being boring, confusing, or overwhelming the reader. There may be bias here, but neither side comes out very well--Bush appearing disengaged while his team did its work; an isolated Gore trying to seem presidential while forfeiting the presidency. It's tempting to say that we should put this squalid bit of electoral history behind us. But anyone who wants to understand the operation of the Bush administration needs to know how it got to the White House in the first place. Toobin's book is the place to start.
Rating:
Summary: A page turner
Review: Jeffrey Toobin is an exceptionally skilled writer and a potent storyteller. His account of the 2000 presidential election controversy is as exciting and absorbing as any fictional thriller by a best-selling author. He presents both sides of the story with remarkable balance: the Bush team's decisive, if ruthless (even vicious) actions; the Gore team's paralyzing ineptitude and bad luck. Toobin infuses the story with compelling human drama and makes the complex legal issues crystal clear. In an updated epilogue, Toobin reflects on the popularity of President Bush in light of the September 11th terrorist attacks, and on the implications of the media recounts in the wake of the election.
Rating: 
Summary: luck, dubya and democracy
Review: Molly Ivens once wrote GW Bush is so lucky "if they hung him the rope would break." Nothing comes closer to fulfilling that claim than the 2000 Florida presidential election. No one who has seriously considered the butterfly ballots, questionable absentee ballots, failure of state officials to follow their own laws and rules, and mechanical problems with that election would conclude a majority of Florida's voters intended to vote for Bush. Jeffrey Toobin succintly summarizes the good, the bad and the ugly of the events that led democracy away from the will of the people to the will of five Supreme Court justices. Unlike (perhaps) the other reviewers of this book, I have hands-on experience with punch-card ballot counting machines, software and procedures. I can say without qualification if you want to be absolutely sure, you have to look at the ballots themselves. The voting machines mis-calibrate, voters and others mishandle the cards, the counting machines jam possibly losing or double-counting a ballot. Anyone who has used a copier has a sense of how much trust we should place in these devices. Toobin briefly describes the events, legal issues, political maneuvering and, in particular, the failure of Florida's elected officials to do the jobs the citizens entrusted to them. He has criticism for many of the participants and particularly Katherine Harris, Joe Lieberman, Theresa Lapore and Sanders Sauls. If you admire any of those people, you won't like this book. Several reviewers have given "Too Close To Call" one-star for Toobin's presumed liberal bias. He clearly argues that Floridian's INTENDED choice for President did not win. Those who already disagree with that conclusion will find no comfort here.
Rating: 
Summary: doc in Louisiana
Review: Not exactly that well researched. It's interesting that I've read four books on this subject and all tend to rely on the same references and interpret it according to their own biases. Yeah, it's interesting reading, but nothing I'd keep on my bookshelf for very long.
Rating:
Summary: READ 'EM ALL AND LEARN HOW G.W. BUSH IS NOT REALLY OUR PRES.
Review: Read all the election 2000 recount books and thus learn how G.W. Bush is not really our authentic president, rather an "illegal" or "alien" resident of the White House. Toobin, as usual, is a great writer who tackles great subjects like the election 2000 re-count -- which the USSC on a five to four vote halted the re-count -- thus committing a non-violent coupe of the presidentcy and thus our country. READ THIS BOOK!!!!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Bush lovers have no use for truth.
Review: This book exposes a number of myths created by the right wing hate machine regarding the Florida election. For example, Al Gore did NOT try and prevent the counting of military ballots from overseas. He tried to stop the counting of ILLEGAL overseas ballots that were counted in violation of Florida law. These ballots lacked postmarks, signatures, some were mailed from inside the United States, and some contained two ballots both for Bush! The Bush campaign insisted that these be counted and they got their way. Toobin is a fine writer and helps confirm the truth. G.W. Bush DID NOT WIN the 2000 election. The evidence is overwhelming.
Rating:
Summary: Good story but a bitter liberal author
Review: This book is a quick read full of interesting details. You just have to tolerate the author's obvious dismay that Gore lost the election. While both sides did what they felt was appropriate to protect their positions, Toobin only finds fault with Republican tactics. When he simply tells the story from behind the scenes he is very effective. But when he frequently interjects his opinions it is only to criticize the Bush side and shows his obvious bias. Quite disturbing is Toobin's agreement that racism was involved in Duval County. Only the most bitter partisans for Gore still believe race played any part. Toobin complains that 9,000 black voters had their votes not counted and he bellows about it. Not mentioned is the nearly 13,000 additional votes from white areas in Duval also not counted. But Toobin is not bothered at all by this. Typical to liberals, someone is "partisan" when they disagree with a liberal position. He finds huge "partisanship" with the U.S. Supreme Court decision but none whatsoever with the Florida Supreme Court's often ridiculed rulings. Likewise, his trashing of Harris as a servant of Bush is... one-sided. There is little doubt that if every vote had been cast and counted legally, Gore would have won. But, to get to this potential outcome, many laws would have been ignored or broken. We are a nation of laws and they must take priority over all else. The U.S. Supreme Court finally upheld these laws, plain and simple. As a nation we cannot ignore laws simply because we do not like their result. And we cannot have courts legislating to get the desired results. Laws are blind, impartial, and the supreme rules of the land. The rule of law is the legacy of the Florida election. Keep that in mind as you read Toobin's interesting account of these prolific events.
Rating:
Summary: One party wanted it more and fought a dirty fight to get it
Review: This was an excellent book that rehashed the incredible events of the Presidential Election. You think of the scandalous and memorable situations that were accorded to our parents generation (Kennedy assassination and Nixon resignation, Vietnam, etc.) and our grandparents and WWII - we as a generation are characterized by the tumultuous events of the last two years with the questionable ascension of power for our current president, George Bush - and eight months after his presidency starts, the attack on the World Trade Center commences. These last couple of years has been incredible and their memory will be etched in our brains. The book takes a look at the differing styles and situations governing the Florida election results. Without playing with politics and questioning the rationale of an electoral system, Toobin instead focuses on the strategies of each political camp and why voters were disenfranchised. The Democrats and their leadership are used to "street fights" and winning at all costs by pulling out the labor muscle and "Al Sharpton" tactics to get things done. However, Al Gore wanted to take the high road and make this a legal battle and legitimately contest the Florida election for president, which essentially was a statistical tie. In contrast, the republicans, still smarting after the Bill Clinton years, wanted to win at all costs, no matter what the situation - they played the political battle. Ironically the Democrats tried to play the statesman like role, and defended state rights with the Florida Supreme Court in their corner - whereas the Republicans turned to the federal court system in another unbelievable twist in this saga. The saga is ended by a fallible court that is decidedly conservative and invokes an equal protection clause, which is normally reserved to protect the poor and downtrodden. Ironically it protects George Bush, the Republicans, the establishment, the "Brooks Brothers" mob, etc. and makes an emotional judgment that disenfranchised the country and who they legitimately picked for president. This book cuts through the rhetoric of both camps and cuts to the chase - one party wanted the presidency more and fought a dirty battle to get it. For better or for worse this country was changed by the election, and this book gives a great insight to this incredible story. I think you'll find that people that gave this book a bad review are judging it because they didn't like to hear the "truth."
Rating:
Summary: A liberal author rips into Al Gore
Review: Toobin is famous for his pro-Democratic sympathies, but what makes this book tolerable to conservatives (like me) is his unrelenting loathing of Gore as spineless and milquetoast, and his grudging admiration for the GOP's no-holds-barred tactics. Toobin covers the events from election night to the unofficial non-partisan tabulation released in November 2001. Although he does an excellent job of explaining the incredibly complicated series of events, Toobin makes no effort to be neutral and doesn't hold back from labeling people as spineless, incompetent, or ruthless. He explains how some judges in the lower-level Florida judiciary were in over their heads, and although Democrats, did Gore great harm, while other minor judges rose to the occasion and demonstrated impressive leadership. According to Toobin, the Palm Beach "butterfly ballot" fiasco was not nearly important as the Democrats' decision not to challenge the massive numbers of improper absentee ballots. Toobin's theme is that while Gore focused on managing the process in a statesmanlike way, the GOP concentrated on winning at any cost. According to this author, Clinton said he would have declared victory, played the race card, fought the inclusion of the controversial military ballots, and encouraged mass protests in the streets. One wonders where such an approach would have led. The author's harshest criticism is reserved for the US Supreme Court, where Rehnquist and his allies abused their power and behaved as unscrupulous political hacks. Even conservatives find it difficult to defend Rehnquist's action that stopped the statewide recount. Ironically, later examination of the ballots showed that the statewide recount would have ended in Bush's favor anyway, and all Rehnquist's intervention accomplished was to taint the (already dubious) legitimacy of Bush's victory. Toobin reminds us that a non-partisan consortium that examined every ballot discovered that under any criterion of defining what constituted a valid vote, Gore would have won the election (although not under the rules imposed by the Florida Supreme Court for the statewide recount, which limited the recount to ballots already deemed questionable). In an ideal world, Gore deserved to win the Florida vote count and hence the presidency, but no voting system can hold up when an election comes down to roughly a hundred votes in a nation of a quarter-billion people. Toobin blames the ruthlessness of the Republicans and the spinelessness of Al Gore for what happened.
| 
