Four times:
1824, John Quincy Adams won with 38,000 fewer votes than Andrew Jackson. Neither won the electoral college, but Adams won the vote in the House.
1876, Hayes won with 264,000 fewer votes
1888, Harrison won with 95,000+ fewer votes
2000, Bush won with 536,000+ fewer votes
Also, Clinton did not win the Popular vote in 1992, but only won the plurality of the vote. This is because Perot recieved 19% of the popular vote, however Perot won no electoral votes.
Edit:
I'm sorry, I answers the opposite of what you asked for.
1824, Andrew Jackson lost the electoral, but won popular.
1876, Samuel J. Tilden lost the electoral, but won popular.
1888, Grover Cleveland
2000, Al Gore
2006-08-22 14:48:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by Andrew H 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Presidents have won the constitutional election while not recieving a majority of the the sum of the state popular votes a total of four times. The first time was 1824 (Andrew Jackson - 42.3% of the votes), however there were three other candidates dividing both the popular and electoral votes. The second case was in 1876 when Rutherford Hayes recieved fewer popular votes (47.9%) but won the electoral college, 185 to 184 against Samuel Tilden. Again in 1888 Benjamin Harrison recieved more electoral votes (233) than Stephen Grover Cleveland (168), but recieved fewer popular votes. He still did not recieve a majority of the votes, only a plurality. Finally, this was repeated in 2000 when Gore recieved a plurality of the popular vote, but Bush won the elctoral college.
The two things to remember are that there is a difference between majority and plurality. Majority means more than half, while plurality just means more than everyone else (but perhaps less than half). This was especially true in the early years of the republic when there would often be more than two candidates. Finally, the Constitution gives us the electoral college, so the sum of popular votes do not matter.
2006-08-22 14:52:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First a clarification on some responses. President Andrew Johnson assumed the office of the President when President Lincoln was assassinated so there was no vote, popular or electoral.And he only served the 1 term.
Jackson won both the popular and the electoral voting but the US House of Representatives circumvented the process and "proclaimed" Adams as the President.
In addition to Al Gore (and let's not forget that even the Florida vote is still being contested) I recall there was one other, but haven't ID that person as yet.
But it might be of interest to learn that the following Presidents lost the popular vote but won the electoral college vote.
-President Grover Cleveland in 1888
-President Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876
2006-08-22 15:01:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by iraq51 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
4 times
2006-08-22 14:46:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
ok element through element, it really is lengthy because the question information are lengthy. Hawaii's votes count number extra less than the Electoral college equipment than they do less than universal vote equipment. So does Alaska's. They beneift from the Electoral college. Will AK, hi, ND ever be hotly contested battlegrounds? Who knows, New Hampshire each in certain situations is, similar with WV they're small states. actual if applicants in ordinary words had to win the universal vote, we may see alot a lot less of them vacationing states and extra of them on television and the internet. The electoral college forces them to make extra appearances than they'd in the different case. The electoral college provides huge states a lot less power, because their votes count number a lot less in percentage to the persons. maximum folk of human beings needed Bush over Kerry, Bush received both universal and electoral. It became Gore who received the universal and lost the electoral. (please do not thumb down me for this I even haven't any opinion over Florida) seem when you're purely dissatisfied with 8 years of Bush, fantastic, purely say so, yet do not blame the Electoral college.
2016-12-01 00:56:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
In the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000, the candidate who received a plurality of the popular vote did not become president.
2006-08-22 14:42:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by tiger_lilly33186 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Four Times
Andrew Jackson 1824
Samuel Tilden 1876
Grover Cleveland 1888
Al Gore 2000
2006-08-22 14:41:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by MEL T 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
four times in 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000.
2006-08-22 14:41:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Edward 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
twice Al Gore in 2000 and I think the other was against Andrew Johnson
2006-08-22 14:36:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Chainsaw 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it has been like 4 or 5 times!!! LOOK FOR IT MORE often now as we are getting computer voting mac hines !!!!!! AS any 3rd grader knows-----THEY can be FIXED to show any result needed to keep the NEO-CONS in office... and SUCKING we Real Ameri-kuns dry!!
2006-08-22 14:43:28
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋