United States presidential election ofAmerican presidential election held on Nov. Bush narrowly lost the popular vote to Democrat Al Gore but defeated Gore in the electoral college. He captured it easily, seeing off a challenge from Bill Bradleya former U. Bush ultimately prevailed after a strenuous fight, including an especially brutal effort by the Bush campaign in the South Carolina primary.
The Presidential Election: Bush, but lost the presidency in the electoral college by a count of Even this count was suspect, dependent on the tally in Florida, where many minority voters were denied the vote, ballots were confusing, and recounts were mishandled and manipulated.
The choice of their leader came not from the citizens of the nation, but from lawyers battling for five weeks. The final decision was made not by million voters, but by a majority of the unelected U. Supreme Court, issuing a tainted and partisan verdict. That decision ended the presidential contest, and George W.
Bush now heads the conservative restoration to power, buttressed by thin party control of both houses of Congress. The election ofhowever, will not fade.
It encapsulates the political forces shaping the United States at the end of the twentieth century. Its controversial results will affect the nation for many years of the new era.
While Gore and Bush received essentially identical support in the total popular vote, they drew this support from very different constituencies. The electoral map Figure 1 illustrates the cleavage. In carrying the preponderance of states 30Bush changed the landscape of American politics.
Gore won in only 20 states and the District of Columbiaalmost all on the geographical fringes of the nation--bordering the Atlantic Ocean north of the Potomacthe Pacific Ocean, and the Great Lakes.
While Gore won as much as two-thirds of the votes in New England, he won fewer than one in three in the Mountain states.
These differences among the states were considerably more marked than in recent contests. Even though he accumulated a million fewer votes than Gore as well as a smaller plurality in the combined totals of these states, the inherent tilt of the electoral college toward the smaller states brought a draw in this particular matchup.
The geographical pattern of party support in was quite similar to that seen in recent elections, a correlation of. The close national division was reflected in some of the states.
A shift of merely a quarter of 1 percent of state votes--an infinitesimal national total of 17, ballots nationally--would have reversed 55 electoral votes from five states Florida, Iowa, New Mexico, Oregon, and Wisconsin.
Only in these close states, particularly Florida, did votes for the minor candidacies of Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan make a difference--but there they were still an immense influence. Nader and his Green party won merely 3 percent 2, of the national vote, far below the 5 percent required to receive federal financial support in the future his principal goaleven less than the support won by Ross Perot as a third-party candidate in 8 percent and 19 percentand vastly less than the extravagant attention Nader had attracted in the press.
Buchanan did far worse, gaining less than half a million votes. If Nader had not been on the ballot, Gore would have carried Florida and all of the other close states easily, giving him a comfortable electoral total of at least Even without Florida, we might speculate--but cannot demonstrate--that an election without Nader would have enabled Gore to campaign in other winnable states most obviously Tennessee and New Hampshire and overcome his shortfall of only three electoral votes.
Parties and the Vote The geography of the election reflected a changing pattern of party loyalties. As the nation endured this odd election at the beginning of the new millennium, major changes in the character of its political parties also emerged.
Two major divisions had structured American presidential elections for much of the twentieth century.
The major controversies between the parties centered on the role of the national government, particularly its distribution of taxes and benefits--such as jobs, Social Security, and health care--among different groups.
Democrats won all but two presidential elections from toassembling a winning coalition of lower-income voters, Catholics, union members, blacks, and white southerners.
During the latter third of the century, new issues and new coalitions came to the fore.Oct 27, · After all, in the presidential election, it was the vote win in Florida that enabled George W. Bush to beat Al Gore, even though the latter had received more than , of the total Author: Manju Bansal.
A critical analysis of the american presidential elections 2 de dezembro de / Outros / Andrs Seplveda rigged elections throughout Latin America for almost a decade. An analysis of presidential elections between and found that the availability of mortgage credit is a critical indicator in presidential races and has five times as much impact on voter.
The collection also features material that examines the media climate around which presidential election politics unfold and the rise of social media and digital outreach in the historic election of Barack Obama as the first African American president of the United States in The election could be called a watershed event in American history.
But it will only be those who write the history books a generation from now who will be able to say for sure - embroiled as we are today in the heat of it all, we cannot tell. Politics at CNN has news, opinion and analysis of American and global politics Find news and video about elections, the White House, the U.N and much more.