Two years ago, election fervor had a completely different tenor. The Voter News Service, and the major media outlets that depended upon it, made the now-infamous foxtrot between the declared winners of the presidential election.

In 2002, neither the political spin doctors nor the competing media are poised to confidently declare winners in races across communities and states. In contrast to previous elections in which winners were projected and proclaimed with incomplete precinct reports, this year, even the party die-hards appear in their hopeful gatherings and preface statements to the media with qualifiers — “We’re hopeful” and “We’re looking forward to a long night” — an appreciable difference from years where party lackeys proudly talked about “the next senator” or “the next governor.”

The shift from election-night hyperbole to election-night prudence reflects a new respect for the uncertainties associated with playing the percentage game after a long push and get-out-the-vote. The media learned the perils of election-night prophecy.

Moreover, the nation has changed in its estimation of truth, of safety, of certainty in projections. We have a new-found appreciation for the concrete and the absolute; we want the precious things that can be in black in white to be presented as such. We want to know that someone won only after every vote is counted, not that someone won on the hunch of a political guru.

After the 2000 presidential election, many Americans felt their votes counted. By not declaring a winner before all the precincts are counted, we still operate with a democratic veneer of one person, one vote.

Several extraordinary circumstances across the nation enforced the importance of upholding the right of Americans to franchisement. In Arkansas, a judge ordered election officials to keep the polls open later than scheduled to ensure counties with discrepancies an opportunity for voters to cast their ballots. In Minnesota, despite the tragic accident that claimed the life of incumbent Senator Paul Wellstone, state officials scrambled to fill the remainder of the term, the Democrats found a new candidate and those who cast absentee ballots were given the opportunity to vote again and choose between two candidates in a new, yet tight, race.

The lessons of 2000 and the controversy surrounding local polling stations in Florida have given rise to a new outlook on voting outcomes and the celebration on election night. Certainly, a more cautious view of elections has been adopted, at least in the short term.

With the power over the legislature hanging in the balance, the exigency of the 2002 race cannot be underestimated. However, less estimation on the part of those announcing the winners leaves more surety, if less gaiety, on election night.

Editorial Board: Cavan Reagan, Amber Billings, Ayrel Clark, Charlie Weaver, Zach Calef, Rachel Faber Machacha.