Does the election of 2000(Bush v. Gore) clearly demostrate that we no longer in a democracy?
Gore won the popular vote yet, GWB still became president. What does this say about our government?
I understand how GWB won. But the PEOPLE voted for Gore in the popular vote.
- justgoodfolkLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
The United States was never a Democracy and was not intended to be one either. The American political system is set up to prevent common folks interrupting the policies and ideas of the "responsible" class
The 2000 elections just made that fact obviously clear to most ordinary Americans
- acyberwinLv 51 decade ago
We never were in a democracy. Read the Constitution.
Article 2 states clearly that there IS NO POPULAR vote for president. There are 50 state votes, each regulated by the state as they see fit...
Once again. Thumbs down for facts... WAKE UP PEOPLE! This is not a democracy, it is a republic. There is no popular vote, there are 50 state votes, and the Constitution doesn't even call for that! It says that each state should choose electors equaling the total number of congressmen in that state, and those electors vote for 2 people... originally, the one with the most votes became president and the second place guy became vice president...
There is no popular vote. READ THE CONSTITUTION! ARTICLE 2! STUDY! AND QUITE WORSHIPING THE MEDIA! THEY LIE!
- 1 decade ago
We have never been a true democracy to be honest.
It is a system setup to ensure that larger, more populated states do not supersede the votes of smaller states. It has worked well since the beginning of the country and will continue to work into the future. He won because he had the most electoral college votes, simple as that.
It says that the system, though not a true democracy, works well in the idea of checks and balances.
- B.KevorkianLv 71 decade ago
No, but the 2008 Democratic primary does illustrate that primary elections don't have to be democratic (nor is it the first).
The electoral college is something of a anachronism. Popular vote might, indeed, be a better alternative. But, it is, for now, the way we choose the president. And, it is a legitimate form of representative democracy.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- DashLv 71 decade ago
No not at all. That is the way the Electoral College works sometimes.
The Electoral College is a still a good system and we should keep it.
The Electoral College was in part designed to force the candidates to appeal to a broad range of people in many states large and small. If we did away with this system, the candidates would be able to focus on getting votes in several large cities. They might ignore less populated portion of the country.
Remember that the United States is a union of 50 separate and independent states. We are not just one big country. On Election Day we do not have one big national election, but instead we hold 50 separate elections, one for each state. In this way each state determines who they want to be President. Each state has different rules that determine how their electors in the college must vote. Almost all states require all of their electors to vote for the winner of the popular vote for that state. Your vote does count!
Each state has electors equal to their total number of congressional seats in the House and Senate. This gives small states like Wyoming and Rohde Island power in the Electoral College that is slightly disproportionate to their population. This is much like the way these small states have slightly disproportionately more power in Congress. This was a compromise that the founding fathers came up with to prevent the states with large populations dominating the national government and exercising control over smaller states.
The fact that on rare occasions the winner of the Electoral College vote will be different from the winner of the nationwide popular vote is not an accident or flaw in the system. The nationwide popular vote is not even mentioned in the constitution. It is merely a number that the news media reports. The founding fathers never had any intention that our President should be elected by way of national popular vote.
A constitutional amendment would be required to change the system. Small states would never agree to ratify such an amendment. It is highly unlikely that it would ever pass.
- smsmith500Lv 71 decade ago
Incorrect, the Democrats were trying to pull a fast one in Florida. They claimed that over and under votes should be counted for Gore. If you did that yes the "popular" vote would have elected Gore. But its equal to stuffing the ballot box.
- wisdomforfoolsLv 61 decade ago
Yes. The Supreme Court chose the President, not the People. The Supreme Court ruled that the continuation of the recount would cause irrefutable harm to George W. Bush. That was their decision, which caused irrefutable harm to the United States.
- Max50Lv 71 decade ago
That the electoral college work.
We are not a democracy but a representative republic.
Just because it didn't go your way in that election.
It was validated in 2004 because Kerry lost the popular vote and guess what he wanted a few more votes in Ohio so he would have one the electoral college.
So why don't mention that?
Oh wait is it because it didn't go your way?
- Kevin CLv 51 decade ago
Hate to break it to you, but we are not and never were a democracy. The founders specifically did NOT want a democracy and described it as "mob rule." We are a Republic. If everyone in America knew that and understood the difference, we would be a lot better off.
- 1 decade ago
bush winning had nothing to do with the supreme court as conservatives would have you believe. nothing to do with the electoral college either. bush slimed his way into office thanks to the fact that his brother arranged to have large numbers of blacks thrown off the voter rolls in florida. see the documentary "unprecented" and this link for details. also do a search on robert kennedy's reporting on the 2004 election.