In the 2000 United States Presidential election, the close pre-election polls showed the election could be won by either the Republican or the Democrat Party. This election had two strong candidates, with a handful of other third party candidates including Green Party and Reform Party representatives. As I watched the results of the 2000 presidential election, I felt bad for Vice President Albert Gore, Jr. The Presidency seemed to be well within Governor George W. Bush’s grasp. The news networks were showing a big lead for Bush across the country. I turned the television off in my office, and I advised my Soldiers to get back to work. My Soldiers and I were stationed overseas in the Republic of Korea. We were thirteen hours ahead of …show more content…
Bush did win the election thanks in part to the timing, the location, and the tall order facing the Democrats in 2000. The Republican Party stole the 2000 Presidential election. The reasons why I make this assertion is, the Presidential election of 2000 was the perfect storm for the Republican Party with the state of Florida as the star. John Bush, a Republican and the brother of George Bush, was the Florida Governor. The Republicans held the majority of the state’s votes at the end of the initial vote count, which meant the burden of proof of foul play was on the Democrats. The voting system in Florida was bad and very much needed to be overhauled. Both the State Courts and the United States Supreme Court found themselves not wanting to overstep their bounds as they flipped-flopped rulings and laws. The ticking clock did not allow for justice. The magnitude of what was at stake did not seem to warrant an impartial solution. Instead political party spats in the courts, in the media and all over the state of Florida ensued. In the end, the United States Supreme Court ruled to end the dilemma, and that ruling gave the Presidency to George W. Bush. All of the political jargon was just a waste of the country’s time, and any real attempt at justice by the Democrats proved to be futile due to the perfect …show more content…
When the Democrat asked for a state-wide recount, they were met with Republican backlash and found themselves in courts. For the most part the courts ruled in favor of a recount; however the Democrats had to prove the outcome would be significant enough to warrant the recount. Only a few of the counties were found to have enough of a difference in the voting totals to warrant recounts. As the counts from the various counties came to the Secretary of State’s office, the Secretary of State used her power to reject many counties recounts, stating her office would not accept any numbers after this statutory deadline. The question of legality for some counties to recount election returns and have those counts to the Florida Secretary of State’s office on the 14th of November was upheld by the Florida courts. This was later overturned by the State Supreme Court, but these are examples of how the Republicans used their party to dictate how things would play out. Lawyers for Bush asked for the hand counts to be halted due to the potential for bias errors. In the Florida Supreme Court, the Bush lawyers argued that the more time passed, the better the chance for fraud. They argued that Florida state law has deadlines in place for just this kind of issue, and it is not the job of the judiciary to alter the law set in
On October 3rd, 2002, Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone walked unto the Senate floor to give what would be one of the most momentous speeches of his career. A day prior, the Senate leadership had introduced a resolution, backed by the George W. Bush Administration, to authorize the President to attack Iraq. Wellstone, a progressive Democrat, had long been noted for his strong anti-war views. However, he was at the time struggling to win reelection, and a vote against the popular resolution could sway the election in his opponent’s favor. Yet instead of joining the bipartisan chorus for war with Iraq and abandoning his anti-war convictions, Wellstone chose to stand as a “monument of individual courage” and raise his concerns about the direction of American foreign policy (Kennedy 223).
... of Florida, under the Electoral College, electoral votes for the candidate running for office receive a plurality of their popular vote. Therefore, whoever gets the majority of the national electoral votes wins the election. Bush won by a narrow margin of these votes resulting in a mandatory machine recount, which afterwards concluded that Bush’s victory margin, was even narrower. This allowed Al Gore to request a recount in the counties of his choice, so naturally he chose the counties whose votes were historically democratic. The uncertainty continued through the circuit courts all the way to The Florida Supreme Court who ruled in Bush v. Gore that there was not enough time to recount the popular vote ballots without violating the United States constitution. The recounting of the ballots would have violated the Fourteenth Amendments “Equal Protection Clause”.
Bush’s representation questioned that, Does recounts in Florida violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution? Because all the votes were being counted unevenly, with standards varying from county to county, where recounts in counties where he could have majority were not being conducted. Bush Argued the decision went against the Constitution stating “nor shall any State…. Deny to any person within the equal protection of the laws.”
The purpose of this essay is to expose George W. Bush as the fraud he is. From rigging the 2000 presidential election, to waging war on a country that had no connection to the 9/11 bombings on the World Trade Centre Twin Towers. George Bush must be shown for what he really is – a liar, a thief, and a criminal. This essay will go into detail about what Bush is currently doing, how he “won” the 2000 Presidential Election, and what he did before he was president
v[vii] “The Green Papers: Election 2000 Presidential Primary Season.” The Green Papers: Election 2000. 18 Mar. 2000. Online. Internet. 18 Mar. 2000. Available: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/.
From the evidence stated, this was obviously corruption. People in America are raised to believe that the president or presidential candidates could not get away with this sort of thing. This should have been be illegal. The Election of 1824 was the first example of corruption in the United States Presidential Election. Congress should change the law so that this cannot happen ever again.
1. Bovard, James. Feeling Your Pain: The Explosion and Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years. New York: St. Martin’s, 2000
During the November 2000 presidential elections, two children tried to make daddy proud. First there was Albert Gore Jr. – the son of a powerful and respected senator of Tennessee – who was no stranger to politics and privilege. As a child he attended the prestigious St. Alban’s School and while growing up, it was common to see then Vice President Richard Nixon as a guest at the family dinner table. Then there was George W. Bush – a third-generation politician, with his grandfather a former senator, his brother the governor of Florida, and his father being former president. The November 2000 presidential elections would become the battle of dynastic supremacy. Whose silver spoon was shiniest? In the end, Bush’s spoon was voted most polished (at least by the electoral standards, certainly not by the popular) and was given the presidential seat. The election had many Americans frustrated, echoing columnist Lars-Erik Nelson’s protest, “Bush’s spectacular career rebuts the notion that America has become a meritocracy, in which we are all born equal and then judged upon our intelligence, talent, creativity, and aggressiveness” (qtd. in Maass 10).
Secondly, do you agree with election 2000? I surely don't, I mean the wrong president won the election. Gore received 500,000 more votes than Bush. But who won the election, Bush. All because of a policy called the Electoral College. It is a very controversial issue. I know that many people are unhappy about this election. I thought we were a democracy! And we choose are president, not electors.
Although Bush took office in 2001 after a disputed election, he benefited from the traditional presidential honeymoon to win passage of his sweeping tax cuts. Sept. 11 then produced an understandable increase of presidential patriotism. That same public mood helps to influence the failure of the press to apply sufficient skepticism to the president's rationale for the invasion of Iraq, the conflict that will define his presidency. Nevertheless, the results of the 2004 election give Bush the public mandate and congressional support he needs to sustain his policies in Iraq and the war on terror. His re-election, also gives him a stronger base to pursue a conservative domestic agenda. Bush strengthened his showing from the 2000 election, in which he lost the popular vote to Vice President Al Gore but won the electoral count a month later. In 2004, President Bush supporters were loyal towards his leadership qualities, likeability, values, terro...
The majority opinion in this case was on the side of Bush. It was a unimaginably close election, as the final vote went down to the last and final state, Florida. The outcome of Florida's vote recount resulted in a dramatic squeeze on the results. Out of 6 million total votes that resulted from the Florida recount, only 327 votes separated the two presidential candidates (pbs.org). By the time of the final decision, over a month had passed since the original votes were cast (phschools.com).
their vote, and a hole is punched into a ballot where the space for the
In a chart from Document G, there are 4 past elections listed that compare the popular votes to the electoral votes. In the 2000 election, George W. Bush won by 271 electoral votes, while Gore won by 266 electoral votes. This may seem reasonable for Bush to be the president, but when it comes to the popular vote, Gore had the highest amount of popular votes than Bush did. So why did Bush win instead? This is one of the main reasons why the Electoral College should be abolished.
If one were to look at the voting history as of late in America you would surely find information on the Florida catastrophe in 2000. The problem with our voting system today is in the technology being used; many demographic groups find our current systems confusing and hard to use. As voters step into the polling places this election year many will be voting through new devices some even sporting “touch screen” technology and we can only hope that the new technology is understood and accepted.
Hearing news on the wars in the US is an everyday occurrence for the current generation. One may be flipping through channels on the television and hear President Obama giving a speech, scrolling through facebook and see a news article or hear breaking news on the radio while driving to the mall. Americans in the 1970s however, received their news very differently. On May 1st, 1970, President Nixon declared that America had gone back to war with Cambodia. This was a life changing event for many people in the US, including the students at Kent State College. After receiving the news about the war, students from Kent State started protesting and soon enough, May 2nd approached when they’re protest became a rally, stated Jennifer Rosenberg. And this was no longer a protest or rally that could easily be stopped. Houses were burnt, tear gas was used and the National Guard was called in. Four people were pronounced dead and nine severally injured (Rosenberg). People did not find out about this tragic event until long after it had happened. During this time, people did not have a way to contact their loved ones and if they did, more than likely they did not have service because cell phones were still an idea at that time. Today if this were to happen, ...