Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 30, 2015, 03:16:11 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results
| | |-+  2000 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | | |-+  How could Bush win the 2000 presidential election?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: How could Bush win the 2000 presidential election?  (Read 2452 times)
BlueSwan
blueswan
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 563
Denmark


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -7.30

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: December 09, 2013, 06:18:00 am »
Ignore

People were rather unenthusiastic about the election because Gore was seen as boring and yesterday's news, and Bush, while personable, was nothing to get excited about.
True. This is also supported by the fact that voter turnout was terrible for such a close election (for instance, voter turnout was even lower in 1996, but that was understandable given the fact that the result was a foregone conclusion).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Voter_turnout.png
Logged
I Can't Believe It's Not Murder!
Angry_Weasel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12875


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: December 09, 2013, 10:04:05 am »
Ignore

A lot of guys really thought that both of them were very moderate and to many, it came down to is that they were basically the same but Gore cared more for the Environment and Bush cared more about abortion. That helped Bush carry West Virginia, Ohio and Tennessee and basically with people thinking that Gore was "out to get them", let Bush win Nevada, New Hampshire and win in a mini landslide in Colorado (though with the high Nader vote, it seems like Gore wrote off the state too early).
Logged


Effective policing requires to know when backing down is in the best interest of public safety.  By all accounts, the culture of the Ferguson Police was ignorant of that fact, and instead treated Cartman of South Park as a role model for how to be a police officer.
National Progressive
General Mung Beans
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6824
Korea, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -1.91

View Profile
« Reply #27 on: December 09, 2013, 08:37:29 pm »
Ignore

Logged

True Federalist
Ernest
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30329
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: December 09, 2013, 11:37:21 pm »

Short answer: He didn't. (Even ignoring the Florida mess, fewer people voted for Bush than Gore).

Right, because we all know the popular vote determines who wins an election.

We also know what's the definition of democracy. Except for in South Carolina of course. What's called "democracy" in US (electoral college) would be called dictatorship or at best quasi-dictatorship in about 90% of the other nations of the world, including 100% of Western Europe.

Why the Palmetto State hate?
Logged

Quote from: Ignatius of Antioch
He that possesses the word of Jesus, is truly able to bear his very silence. — Epistle to the Ephesians 3:21a
The one thing everyone can agree on is that the media is biased against them.
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4919
United States


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: December 10, 2013, 01:37:18 am »
Ignore

From what I remember, everyone around here thought Clinton was a fine enough President but the whole Monica thing made him despised down here. My area had a ton of Republicans in those days and they were fired up for Bush because he was different than Gore.  My dad hated Clinton but my mom and sister liked him, my mother is still a major fan.

Bush was more real and had a likeable persona, Gore seemed bored and distant, like he thought he was above campaigning.  He didn't connect with the average worker, Bush wanted to do a tax cut and modify the code, all Gore wanted to do was focus on higher up issues. Gore ran a mediocre campaign from the primary until the end, he struggled at one point in the primary. Like Nader said "If Gore ran a better campaign and focused on the issues, he wouldn't have struggled."

My whole family was for Bush though, but I voted for Gore in the school election, I was only 6 so I had no clue.  They found Gore to be a "wimp"
Logged

If I had a chance I'd ask the world to dance..
tara gilesbie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2083
United States


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: March 16, 2015, 12:54:22 am »
Ignore

I think it's quite clear why he won, going by statistics collected in Erika Shaker's book "Great Expectations" comparing American attitudes between 1992 and 2000. The results are...unpleasant. Here's a sampler:

-In 1992, 16% of Americans believed non-whites should not be allowed to immigrate. By 2000, it was 25%

-34% of Americans believed a widely advertised product was probably good in 1992. In 2000, it was 45%.

-In 1992, 66% of Americans discussed local issues with other people. That number was 34% in 2000.

-36% of Americans believed that men should be heads of their household in 1992. In 2000, that number was 49%.

-The number of Americans who believed that violence is a normal part of life rose from 9% in 1992 to 31% in 2000.

-The number who believed that violence is an acceptable way to meet your goals rose from 14% in 1992 to 26% in 2000.

-In 1992, 72% of Americans considered defending the environment a priority. In 2000, 57% did.

-American's time spent watching television increased from 35% to 40% between 1992 and 2000.

-65% of Americans considered materialism a threat to society in 1992. In 2000, that number was 48%.

- In 2000 34% of Americans said they enjoyed showing foreigners that they're smarter and stronger, up from 27% in 1992.

I could go on, but you get the point. Something about the Clinton presidency caused a shift from relatively progressive attitudes toward reactionary conservatism and shallowness. This is why Bush was elected.
Logged

Quote from:  Becoming Female
Suddenly, there was a loud boom. We looked out the window and saw a whole bunch of Death Eaters running into the castle! Umbridge screamed and dropped her teacup on the floor! Lucius burst into the office, along with Fenrir, Bellatrix and Ron.

"How COULD you!" Umbridge shrieked. "I thought we had a deal! We did a pinky swear, remember?"

"I had my fingers crossed behind my back," Lucius explained smugly.

"Damn the loopholes," yelled Umbridge!
OC
olawakandi
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11806
United States


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: March 16, 2015, 05:59:53 pm »
Ignore

Dubya came across as the change agent and Gore came across as a conventional politician. And the Lieberman pick didnt do him any favors. Had Bob Graham, been picked, maybe it would have been overlooked, and squeaked out a narrow victory.
Logged
tara gilesbie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2083
United States


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: March 16, 2015, 06:14:59 pm »
Ignore

Dubya came across as the change agent and Gore came across as a conventional politician. And the Lieberman pick didnt do him any favors. Had Bob Graham, been picked, maybe it would have been overlooked, and squeaked out a narrow victory.

Sure, but it seems a disturbing psychological shift during the Clinton era also helped Bush, as I observe above.
Logged

Quote from:  Becoming Female
Suddenly, there was a loud boom. We looked out the window and saw a whole bunch of Death Eaters running into the castle! Umbridge screamed and dropped her teacup on the floor! Lucius burst into the office, along with Fenrir, Bellatrix and Ron.

"How COULD you!" Umbridge shrieked. "I thought we had a deal! We did a pinky swear, remember?"

"I had my fingers crossed behind my back," Lucius explained smugly.

"Damn the loopholes," yelled Umbridge!
Türkisblau
H_Wallace
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2296
Ireland, Republic of


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: March 16, 2015, 06:38:19 pm »
Ignore

I think it's quite clear why he won, going by statistics collected in Erika Shaker's book "Great Expectations" comparing American attitudes between 1992 and 2000. The results are...unpleasant. Here's a sampler:

-In 1992, 16% of Americans believed non-whites should not be allowed to immigrate. By 2000, it was 25%

-34% of Americans believed a widely advertised product was probably good in 1992. In 2000, it was 45%.

-In 1992, 66% of Americans discussed local issues with other people. That number was 34% in 2000.

-36% of Americans believed that men should be heads of their household in 1992. In 2000, that number was 49%.

-The number of Americans who believed that violence is a normal part of life rose from 9% in 1992 to 31% in 2000.

-The number who believed that violence is an acceptable way to meet your goals rose from 14% in 1992 to 26% in 2000.

-In 1992, 72% of Americans considered defending the environment a priority. In 2000, 57% did.

-American's time spent watching television increased from 35% to 40% between 1992 and 2000.

-65% of Americans considered materialism a threat to society in 1992. In 2000, that number was 48%.

- In 2000 34% of Americans said they enjoyed showing foreigners that they're smarter and stronger, up from 27% in 1992.

I could go on, but you get the point. Something about the Clinton presidency caused a shift from relatively progressive attitudes toward reactionary conservatism and shallowness. This is why Bush was elected.

Uh, how have I not seen this before? What is this attributed to?
Logged

"Gentlemen, we stand only to place humanity above the dollar." - Sen. Burton K. Wheeler

tara gilesbie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2083
United States


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: March 16, 2015, 07:28:55 pm »
Ignore

I think it's quite clear why he won, going by statistics collected in Erika Shaker's book "Great Expectations" comparing American attitudes between 1992 and 2000. The results are...unpleasant. Here's a sampler:

-In 1992, 16% of Americans believed non-whites should not be allowed to immigrate. By 2000, it was 25%

-34% of Americans believed a widely advertised product was probably good in 1992. In 2000, it was 45%.

-In 1992, 66% of Americans discussed local issues with other people. That number was 34% in 2000.

-36% of Americans believed that men should be heads of their household in 1992. In 2000, that number was 49%.

-The number of Americans who believed that violence is a normal part of life rose from 9% in 1992 to 31% in 2000.

-The number who believed that violence is an acceptable way to meet your goals rose from 14% in 1992 to 26% in 2000.

-In 1992, 72% of Americans considered defending the environment a priority. In 2000, 57% did.

-American's time spent watching television increased from 35% to 40% between 1992 and 2000.

-65% of Americans considered materialism a threat to society in 1992. In 2000, that number was 48%.

- In 2000 34% of Americans said they enjoyed showing foreigners that they're smarter and stronger, up from 27% in 1992.

I could go on, but you get the point. Something about the Clinton presidency caused a shift from relatively progressive attitudes toward reactionary conservatism and shallowness. This is why Bush was elected.

Uh, how have I not seen this before? What is this attributed to?

No theories were given in the book, the data was in a chapter on global attitudes.
Logged

Quote from:  Becoming Female
Suddenly, there was a loud boom. We looked out the window and saw a whole bunch of Death Eaters running into the castle! Umbridge screamed and dropped her teacup on the floor! Lucius burst into the office, along with Fenrir, Bellatrix and Ron.

"How COULD you!" Umbridge shrieked. "I thought we had a deal! We did a pinky swear, remember?"

"I had my fingers crossed behind my back," Lucius explained smugly.

"Damn the loopholes," yelled Umbridge!
mathstatman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 367
United States


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: May 07, 2015, 07:15:26 pm »
Ignore

I think it's quite clear why he won, going by statistics collected in Erika Shaker's book "Great Expectations" comparing American attitudes between 1992 and 2000. The results are...unpleasant. Here's a sampler:

-In 1992, 16% of Americans believed non-whites should not be allowed to immigrate. By 2000, it was 25%

-34% of Americans believed a widely advertised product was probably good in 1992. In 2000, it was 45%.

-In 1992, 66% of Americans discussed local issues with other people. That number was 34% in 2000.

-36% of Americans believed that men should be heads of their household in 1992. In 2000, that number was 49%.

-The number of Americans who believed that violence is a normal part of life rose from 9% in 1992 to 31% in 2000.

-The number who believed that violence is an acceptable way to meet your goals rose from 14% in 1992 to 26% in 2000.

-In 1992, 72% of Americans considered defending the environment a priority. In 2000, 57% did.

-American's time spent watching television increased from 35% to 40% between 1992 and 2000.

-65% of Americans considered materialism a threat to society in 1992. In 2000, that number was 48%.

- In 2000 34% of Americans said they enjoyed showing foreigners that they're smarter and stronger, up from 27% in 1992.

I could go on, but you get the point. Something about the Clinton presidency caused a shift from relatively progressive attitudes toward reactionary conservatism and shallowness. This is why Bush was elected.

Uh, how have I not seen this before? What is this attributed to?

No theories were given in the book, the data was in a chapter on global attitudes.

Harrowing. I can only suspect that (1) Clinton's philandering was still considered unacceptable, and Gore took flak for his association with him; (2) voters were ready for change; and (3) there really were people who opposed increased oversight of racial profiling, supported school vouchers, etc. What always bothered me, still does, is that I am convinced more people in FL left the voting booth thinking they had voted for Gore than had voted for Bush. Buchanan overperformed in Palm Beach Co, FL--and by more than 537 votes.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines