summarize the gore-bush election case 0f 2000.?
825400
Two words:\nStill Counting
859238
refer \nhttp://news.thomasnet.com/fullstory/5610
279695
Free and fair elections is the first criteria.  This is why Bush is not legitimate - stemming from his theft of the election in 2000.
253896
I'm sorry but I don't think you'll find the link above ^ to be particularly useful. Try this one instead and I think you'll find what you're looking for: http://politics1.com/parties.htm
731320
Obama/Gore what a winning team!\nGore/Obama another winning team!\nHillary is dirty, she's a Neocon in sheeps clothing.
1032581
Ask Al Gore.  I think he has a spare on nowadays.
957666
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!\nWhat a great and intelligent question.\nYou just summed up the whole election in just 2 sentences.
485727
Try here:\n\nhttp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1104644/posts
1018642
Not a viable one. It's been tried. The Democrats and Republicans have the game locked up.
143341
go to\nhttp://www.politicalgraveyard.com\n\nthere is information there about that particular election.
292705
The executive branch had very little to do with the election in 2000 other then be cannon fodder to the right wing neo cons. The judicial was the one that appointed Bush.
262092
http://www.myflorida.com/myflorida/cabinet/agenda01/0206/trans.html\nthis link may help you find what your looking for.
506581
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burning_bush\n\nSee above
956020
It started with the Terry Schiavo thing. That wasn't even about right to life. It was about a couple of controlling parents making a federal case out of a family issue. That's when Bush blew his "political capital". After turning a surplus into a huge deficit and losing thousands of lives in an illegal, dishonest, and mismanaged war, Bush has a lot to answer for. He destroyed the ability of the Federal government to respond to Katrina. That's going to take a lot of rebuilding.
65510
Personally speaking:\n\n1) 2000 the Democrats won (Gore polled more votes than Bush) but due to the fact of the electoral system, Bush won the election because they concentrated their votes in the states with the big electoral college delegations\n\n2) 2004 the Democrats lost because as in 2000, the Republicans concentrated their votes in the big electoral college stats but also arranged several referenda on gay marriage to boost the Republican turnout.
918916
It has happened.  Even in the 2000 Presidential Election, Gore called to concede, then realized that he might not have lost after all.\n\nThe bottom line is that the person who gets the most votes is elected, and the fact that he has conceded doesn't change that.\n\nGood luck!!
382087
See...that's the problem.  Bush in both elections really was the lesser of two evils.  We didn't really "want" Bush but when it came to the idea of Gore or Kerry as Commander In Chief it was like....OHN!!!