Each presidential election overview has always been similar to a three-ring circus, but in the 2000 Election with Al Gore and George W. Bush, was by far one of the biggest circuses ever. Democrats had reason to worry about the election. Republicans held the White House for three consecutive terms from 1980 to 1992, voters often grow tired of one party after two terms.
They were hoping to win control, yet there was a lot at stake with the election at the time. And even though it came to be a quite chaotic election, it was by far the closest election ever in history. The main problem was that the results were so close in Florida that it became indefinite who the winner was. It took over a month to finally attain the results. Ultimately it was not the citizens whose votes counted, but the vote of the Supreme Court for the election case. Al Gore had a good start to begin with, having high marks on his ability to handle key issues, including Democratic stands on such as health care, education and Social Security.
But Gore changed all that on the last day of the Democrats ” Los Angeles national convention. Whether it was the highly publicized kiss he gave his wife or not, Gore changed the public’s view of him. No longer was he a just a stiff politician. Instead, he was a passionate, loving father and husband who lacked many of Clinton’s weaknesses. And Gore jumped a few points ahead of Bush. The Monica Lewinsky scandal Clinton had did not necessarily give him a bad reputation.
The Term Paper on The 2000 Presidential Election
... be a close one. With "Gore [taking] aim at ... polls being in Gores favor one week and Bush's favor the next week this election is going to ... States there are many issues that surround the election. Us Americans are going to vote for whomever ... should not have a significant effect in the election. Both presidential hopefuls are well educated.The both have ...
On the contrary, people continued to cast their support for the president since the public thought he had done so much for our nation. Yet in the 2000 Election Gore seemed to go in the completely opposite direction of Clinton, or at least try to avoid his name in his speeches at first. Yet Gore’s luck did not change when he left California. Bush seemed to have difficulties when asked about his tax cut plan and about his statement that the.
S. military was not fully ready. While Gore looked relaxed and energetic, Bush made mistakes in front of the camera. Polls suggested that Gore was far ahead of Bush by at least a few points. Republicans became much less optimistic about Bush, while things were looking very promising for the Democrats. Gore’s campaign was focused on issues that were mostly concerned by women, such as health care and education.
‘We ” re for the people. Big tobacco, big oil, the big polluters, the pharmaceutical companies, the HMO’s. Sometimes you have to be willing to stand up and say no, so families can have a better life,’ Gore said. That same night Gore claimed to protect abortion rights and said: ‘The last thing this country needs is a Supreme Court that overturns’ a woman’s right to choose. On the other hand, Bush’s issues were geared more towards getting the male vote by concentrating on economic issues and tax cuts.
But the race changed yet again before the end of September, when Bush went on two popular television shows and Gore was hit by the media for exaggerating and embellishing stories. Gore was being questioned over the issue of his character. The polls now seemed to favor Bush. Bush did even better in the second presidential debate.
For the third debate television viewers seemed to be split between Bush and Gore. So, as the Election Day was closer and closer, it was showing that it was going to be an extremely close election and an uncertain outcome. It took twenty-five electoral votes and a little over a month of recounting and the bickering between each other’s lawyer to finally claim a winner. In the Court hearing of Bush vs. Gore, the Supreme Court decision gave George Bush the presidency. Decision that declares a winner cannot be justified legally before every way of counting every vote.
The Essay on Bush Gore
Bush Attacks Gore, Citing 'Pattern of Embellishments' By ALISON MITCHELL ORLANDO, Fla., Sept. 23 At the end of a campaign swing that was intended to focus on issues, Gov. George W. Bush stepped up his personal criticisms of Vice President Al Gore today, accusing him of "misleading Americans" through a "pattern of embellishments and sudden reversals." Mr. Bush assailed Mr. Gore in a speech he ...
Many felt it was unfair by the termination of the rest of the vote count. It was like their vote did not matter. Al Gore publicly surrendered after Supreme Court hearing of Al Gore vs. George Bush. After Bush vs. Gore was decided many people were outraged and began to doubt the Court.
The conservative Justices, who have always been pro-state rights, were suddenly against state rights. They had ignored Florida’s rights to determine its own results in the 2000 Presidential election through its own system. This ruling against state rights just so happened to lead to the winning of George Bush. On the other hand, the liberal Justices, who have always supported Equal Protection rights against the states began to argue against it.
They suddenly supported state rights when it benefit ted the Democratic Presidential candidate, insisting that the Court should just leave Florida alone. So the question still stands if the election was based on politics or principles. Some argue that it was not entirely based on principles because the Court had the same reaction in the recent Party of Minnesota vs. White decision, which had the exact same results. Both Court cases had a 5-4 conservative majority that a state did not have the right to decide how elections in that state would be held.
Instead, the Bill of Rights restricted how elections had to occur. Ultimately, the Justices held the very same positions in 2000 that they did in 2002, there for showing consistency, thus making it justified. It was very clear that there was a lot at stake in the 2000 elections. But the voters did not seem passionate about one party or the other. That meant that all the races-from president down to the House-had to focus on individual candidates and their campaigns. Yet still it seemed like the voters wanted the fighting to come to an end and to elect a president.
Yes, the public were angered how the election went down but the most important thing to the nation was to finally have a president.
