there were 810 votes cast 1 candidate has 220 more than the 2nd candidate How many votes did they each get?
345416
Let X=the number of votes the losing candidate got. Therefore X+220 is the number the second got.\nSo:\n\nX +(X+200)=810\n2X+220=810\n2X=590\nX=295 and X+220=515\nNot a very close race really
873857
this is like statistic..in one side u have 14 individuals and the other side u have 16 individuals so when you test the difference of 2 population take 14 out of each of population and the sum of that is 28 so,...28 is the answer....lol
888717
DEPENDS ON THE QUALITY OF THE VOTING MACHINES.\nGOD BLESS
627495
In the 2004 election, President Bush received more than 62 million votes and John Kerry receive more than 59 million votes.
86515
MPs\nvoted by the people
357680
I'm trying 2 figure out how 2 chick this question.
1021314
In the last polls, 80% of the population was eligible to vote but only 74% of that 80% was registered to vote. In other words, out of a 100 people 80 were eligible to vote but 59.2 were registered to vote.\n80% of 100 = 80\n74% of 80 = 59.2
580184
there wasnt one loser
702073
30 30 150 180 1200\n\n100 100 100 200 1200
518637
Elliott Yamin had the lowest number of votes (33%).  The two others received 33.2% and 33.8%, so it was very close.
1038384
Why don't people ever get this? Don't they teach Civics in school anymore? Only 538 people voted in the Presidential Election. The rest of us voted for Electors. That's why it's called an Electoral College.\n\nDuh.
1127766
61 Million votes\n\nThat's how.
636765
Lets see...\n\nyou only need 6 states to win, \nand you only need 51 votes in each of those states,\n\nso 306.  \n\nthats 27.5% of the total votes.  So you could actually have 70% of the people vote AGAINST you and still win.
739402
wow zeeb that was a great help...\nanyways, its quite easy to understand. each state has a certain number of vote (known as the electoral votes) that are determined by there population. i.e. the more people the more votes. obviously a state like california or new york would have more votes than say alaska. its the number of votes that each state is given that is actually counted. and that certain number goes to which even president the state voted for. for example lets take california, which has 55 electoral votes, if the majority (60%) voted republican, then the 55 votes would go to the republican candidate. so therefore it is possible to win the popular vote and not become president as shown in the 2000 election i think? not sure...ill explain that too. \nlets say a country has 3 states. state A has 4 electoral votes and has 20,000 people state B has 10 electoral votes and has 50,000 and state C has 5 electoral votes and 30,000 people. 15,000 in state A vote for rep. and 5,000 vote for dem. in state B 30,000 vote for dem. and 20,000 vote for rep. in state C 25,000 vote for rep and 5,000 vote for dem\nSo we have: popular dem(40,000) rep. (60,000)\nand for the electoral votes(dem 10 because majority of state B vote for dem) and rep(9 because majority of state A and C vote of rep)\nso therefore the rep would have more popular vote but does not become president because he didnt win the electoral votes...\nhope that explained it and didnt make it more confusing
926839
The parties (Democrat and Republican) vote for their candidate they want to represent them!  The electoral college has a certain number of people according to the size of their state.  It adds up to 536 and the candidate needs 270 votes to win.  They try to get to get the higher populated states such as Florida, California, Ohio, and Texas so they win.  I believe the voter's votes are factored in also.
787619
Comrad Joe meant that if there are 10,000 votes for a person - and  9,000 for the other person but the people who count the votes only count 8,000 of the votes for the first person -\n\nThe guy with the 9,000 votes gets the nod and wins the election.
952045
The first problem:\nThey would need to win 17 more seats, which would be 17/234, or 7.3%. The minimum whole percent would be 8%.\n\nThe second problem:\nThey would need to win 6 more seats, or 6/16 of the remaining seats, or 37.5%. The minimum whole percent would be 38%.\n\nThe third problem:\n229 is prime; 201 is 3*67; a=229 and b=3. ab=687.\n\nThe fourth problem:\nx could be 4. Then, a=5, b=5. The ratio would be 225 : 205.