A Divided Nation Is United in Relief That It’s Now Over

Hours after word filtered out that Al Gore would concede the election Wednesday, the war flared anew at Macy’s handbag counter in Manhattan.

“This election was stolen, because the fix was in for Bush all along at the Supreme Court,” said Gloria Sloane, a Long Island homemaker. “Nothing has been resolved, and millions still feel angry, like there’s been a death in the family.”

Passing Sloane in the aisle, tourist Richard Smith overheard her and snapped: “Gore lost, lady. Let’s move on, OK?”

Amid the bedlam of holiday shopping, the dialogue echoed America’s painful divide.

Coast to coast, the realization set in that the 2000 election was finally, unbelievably, over. No more sleepless nights with cable TV bloviators; no more suspense around the water cooler. The wounds from the 36-day struggle were still raw, but if there was any common ground, it was a widespread sigh of relief that the national shouting match was ending.

As he shoveled snow in a St. Louis suburb, dentist Stu Pickens said he was glad President-elect George W. Bush won but spoke for many when he added: “America was at the point where people didn’t really care who won anymore. I know I would have put up with Gore just to put an end to this stuff.”

“At this point,” agreed Helen Hagen, a Thousand Oaks elementary school clerk, “I just wanted somebody to be president.”

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on technicalities more than the merits, failing to clear the air, said San Francisco photographer and Gore supporter Cristina Taccone. But in trying to explain this to her 6-year-old son, she added, “Even though you feel you’ve been stabbed in the back, you want to patch up the wound without getting too bitter and making someone else the enemy.”

Far from the Washington Beltway, many Americans voiced confidence that the nation could move on. Still, voices on both sides predicted it would be a long time before deep-seated emotions calmed down, especially among Democrats.

At a Houston community center that provides programs for low-income black residents, founder Deloyd Parker was melancholy about the path leading to the election’s jarring conclusion--especially allegations that large numbers of African Americans in Florida may have been disenfranchised.

“It’s very painful to a lot of people; it cheapens the value of the vote,” Parker said. “I speak at schools, I live in the inner city and the people I come into contact with are disillusioned, angry. There’s a mix of feelings. But none of them are motivational or inspirational.”

If there was one emotion Americans expressed consistently during the five-week-plus standoff, it was a sense that they had become exasperated by the legal wrangling, even though many were willing to be patient. A CNN-Gallup poll this month showed 55% were “bored” by or “fed up” with the clash. Nevertheless, more than 80% said they were paying close attention to it.

Some grew addicted to the coverage. In Denver, freelance writer Ginger Stookesberry said she had set up an election command center in her kitchen, with the set constantly tuned to either CNN or Court TV.

She was sad to see her “favorite show” go off the air. “Everyone I talk to, predominantly women who are home, have been totally engrossed by the process and seeing how the government works. I was never sick of it, although my husband was. And I’m lucky, because my guy won.”

Others couldn’t wait for life to return to normal. The election battle was ultimately about lawyers getting rich and loudmouths getting TV exposure, said Danny Green, a Gore supporter browsing at a Chicago mall. “I’m glad it’s done with [because] all these people on TV are just so hate-filled,” he said. “Would you want any of them over for Christmas dinner?”

Few expect the controversy over recounting ballots to die down, but people on both sides said the nation will simply have to live with this frustrating ambiguity and go forward. William Brinson, a Miami program engineer, said that, in politics, “the decision comes out for or against you. If it comes against you, you feel victimized. If you were the winner, it means you can manipulate the process. And the correct answer here is, we’ll never know.”

This lack of closure angers Republicans as well as Democrats. Bush supporters said they didn’t want their candidate hampered by discontent over disputed ballots. The controversy over voting machines should be addressed, but voters also have to take more responsibility for voting properly in the future, said Cecilia Blades, a Boulder, Colo., resident who praised Bush’s behavior during the stalemate. “We can’t keep checking to see what voters meant.”

Gore backers seemed stunned that the high court didn’t address questions of voter intent. In Boston, public radio talk show host Christopher Lydon devoted his two-hour morning show to reaction to the ruling, as did many call-in shows across the country. “My guess is that people are truly much more burned about the process here--about the flimflam, about government by lawyers, the narrowness of this court language--than they are by the Bush result,” Lydon said.

The final resolution by the Supreme Court “was just really unfair,” said Linda Henderson, a fourth-grade teacher from Cohasset, Mass. “It was purely political and very sad, from everyone’s point of view. It doesn’t matter what side you’re on. The whole process has just been tainted.”

But now, mercifully, it’s over. And for Monica Harp, a Seattle child-care worker out for a walk with several preschoolers, that may be enough.

“All this confusion is such a nightmare, and I hope that future elections don’t end like this. I’m really out of emotions.”

*

Times staff writers Julie Cart, Marlene Cimons, Mike Clary, Claudia Kolker, Elizabeth Mehren and Stephanie Simon, and researchers John Beckham, Lynn Marshall, Edith Stanley and Anna M. Virtue contributed to this story.