考虑到2000年5月6日的一个具体案例，《华盛顿邮报》报道称，为了预测当时美国总统大选的获胜者，多位政治学家对数学模型进行了深入分析。民主党候选人阿尔·戈尔和共和党候选人乔治·w·布什是被提名的两位实力最强的候选人。有了这两个值后，这些变量与几个模型进行了比较，这些模型包括一系列的价值观，如民意数据和州经济，这些都表明戈尔赢得选举的机会非常小(Lo¨vbrand & berg, 2005)。
Considering a specific case of May 6th, 2000 it was reported in a Washington Post that deep analysis of mathematical models were conducted by various political scientists for predicting the winner of US Presidential elections of that time. The two strongest candidates named out were Democratic candidate Al Gore and Republican George W. Bush. After having this two values these variable were measured against several models which included a range of values such as public opinion data and state economywhich all indicated that there are very less chances of Gore to win the election (Lo¨vbrand & berg, 2005).
Now at this point in time polls were closed in most of the states and it was all clear that the final result will depend entirely on the outcome of the casted votes. Counting of votes was started in Florida having 25 electoral votes which was considered most populous and contested states of Florida. At 8:00 P.M. it was announced officially that Gore has win the election on the basis of data collected from Florida Exit polls. But there was some minor call back and results were withdrawn and Bush was named the victor next morning. The closeness of this situation demanded for an automatic recount, then in the initial vote count it was found that there exists a significant difference between Gore and Bush vote count hence the decision was reversed.
This was a straight forward situation which demanded a simple and clear path towards resolution of this problem i.e. count all votes and declares the winner. However it was not simple and easy as it was though out to be, and in the end it was found the Florida winner will not be ascertained through vote counting but the situation demanded a legal battle between each candidate. Hence for representing each party lawyer was called who wasdirected to put forwarded the interests of each candidate towards the Supreme Court of United States. This decision finally made an overturn in earlier Florida Supreme Court ruling and it is decided to finalize this matter through legal and political processes (Jasanoff, 2007).
This scenario and real life evidences above have highlighted four significant points which are:
It was ascertained that voting and balloting is a simple process which is being done from several years without any errors. However in this situation a simple system depicted surprising behavior. It was found that the precious 52 elections were not enough for revealing all possible system behaviors. Hence accurate predictions can never be attained for real life situations but estimates and probable values can be guessed to some extent for future outcomes.
Second uncertainty which became obvious was that Florida elections were no doubt existed in all elections but this entire situation turned out to be significant as the elections were so close that both sides were visualizing themselves as either potential winners or losers. The final outcome was to determine the stakes and the presidency would be determined solely on this outcome.
Third the dispute never got resolved and both parties were subjected to technical aspects of the vote count but the underlying fact was that it was all subjugated by the judicial and political procedures. The legitimate results were interpreted as a negotiation among the competing parties and there existed no transparency in any aspect. However both leaders and their followers agreed on the rules presented by the legal proceedings and accepted the Supreme Court decision. Moreover it was declared that these results are not final and permanent they will be revisited in the next elections.
If in this situation any technical approach would have been taken for overcoming the uncertainty about the vote count then both parties would have been subjected to parameters of scientific methods. Moreover such close attention of public would also not have been attained for resolution of the conflict quickly, legitimately and decisively.