how did the electoral college effect the 2000 election?

Answer 1

Legislative appointment made two more appearances on the electoral stage: first, in 1868, the newly reconstructed state of Florida appointed its electors, having been readmitted too late to hold elections. Then, in 1876, the newly admitted state of Colorado used legislative choice due to a lack of time and money to hold an election. (It was also a potent threat in the 2000 election: had the recounts continued, the Florida legislature was prepared to appoint the Republican slate of electors to avoid missing the federal deadline for choosing electors.)

The Constitution gives the power to the state legislatures to decide how electors are chosen, and it is easier (and cheaper) for a state legislature to simply appoint a slate of electors than to create a legislative framework for holding elections to determine the electors. As noted above, the two situations in which legislative choice has been used since the Civil War have both been because there was not enough time or money to prepare for an election. However, appointment by state legislature has a serious flaw, aside from its democratic deficit: legislatures can deadlock more easily than the electorate. In fact, this is precisely what happened in 1789, when New York failed to appoint any electors.

Losing the popular vote
In the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000, the candidate who received a plurality of the popular vote did not become president. The 1824 election was eventually decided by Congress and thus distinct from the last three which were decided without.

Proponents of the system counter that the Electoral College requires candidates to garner more widespread support throughout the Union; a popular vote system could elect a person who wins by a large margin in a few states over another person who wins by small margins in most states. The latter candidate, the argument goes, has to appeal to a broader array of interests than the former and is less likely to be a demagogue or extremist. However, the Electoral College is not guaranteed to favor the latter candidate in that scenario. In fact, given the 2000 allocation of electors, a candidate could win with the support of just the 11 largest states.

Further, there is currently no such thing as a national "popular vote," because combining the different statewide popular votes into a single national vote has no legal or statistical significance, and claims of the electoral college denying the "popular will" are debatable. For example, voters in Massachusetts or Texas in 2004, as their respective states were sure to vote Democrat or Republican for President, were more likely to vote for a third party candidate, or not vote at all, since their vote for their preferred Democrat or Republican candidate was extremely unlikely to change the result. Conversely, a voter in Florida was more likely to vote Democrat or Republican, even if they favored a third-party candidate, because their vote was much more likely to make a difference.

Answer 2

Electoral College 2000 Election

Answer 3

first of all, it affected the 2000 election :P

in 2000 bush won the electoral college but not the popular vote. that is, the electoral college prevented every vote from counting equally and let the less popular president win.

Answer 4

there are two kinds of votes in the presidential elections:
the popular vote which is determined solely by the number of people who voted for a particular presidential candidate
and the electoral college which is the number of points a presidential candidates has determined by the breakdown of popular votes by state. if a particular pres. candidate won a state, he was awarded a certain number of points, depending on the size and importance of the state. this was to ensure that smaller states were given due attention by the candidates. in the 2000 elections, pres. candidate and former vice president al gore (democrat) won the popular vote which means more americans actually voted for him than his republican counterpart, george w. bush. however, due to the much-contested state of florida which gave bush the needed points (in a us supreme court decision) to win the electoral college vote, bush was declared the winner.

Answer 5

Al Gore won the popular vote. (the most votes in total) But the idiot George Bush won the electoral college. So essentially, the loser won. Haha it has two meanings. The loser as in to person w/ less votes, and as in George Dubya is a huge loser!

Answer 6

meep meep