Yes, we all remember the 2000 election. I was only a junior, but its still burnt in my head. All I heard was, “Bush did this!”, and “Gore did that!” Even some of my friends were talking about how the Florida count was bogus. But, what about the election of 1876? There wasn't CNN back then, or Facebook status posts on what happened during the election. Lets compare, and see which one was “more fair or not.” My opinion, the election of 2000 was more unfair. Here is why The election of 1876, the Republicans nominated Rutherford B. Hayes, while the Democrats selected Samuel J. Tilden. The final count pointed to a Tilden victory, as the Democrats captured the swing states of Connecticut, Indiana, New Jersey, and New York. By midnight on Election
…show more content…
Funny, Florida was involved in the controversy again. Republican nominee George W. Bush, and Democrat nominee Al Gore were in a head to head battle throughout the night. Leaving one state that could possibly win it for one of the nominees. Gore had more popular votes, but Bush (thanks to Florida) had more electoral votes. Since Bush had more electoral votes, he was named as the next President. With such a close margin between votes, they had to go back and recount all of the ballets. They noticed that there were some ballots that were not punched in properly. When they found this out, lawyers were called in to start filing lawsuits. Recount, after recounts were going on months after the election. Even some minorities were subjected to show extra identification to vote. Democrats called foul blaming Republicans for this issue. Other than the fact that there were more people in 2000 than 1876, there was more to sway other peoples opinions in different directions. Now, you have the media (T.V. Radio, Etc) who gave the voters their personal opinions on the matter, which made people automatically take sides even if they did not vote or follow the election closely. Same thing would have happened if there were these types of resources in 1876. If FOX news, or CNN stated that most Republicans knew about the intimidating tactics that the southern Democrats used to keep blacks and Republicans away from the polls, there would
Funny, Florida was involved in the controversy again. Republican nominee George W. Bush, and Democrat nominee Al Gore were in a head to head battle throughout the night. Leaving one state that could possibly win it for one of the nominees. Gore had more popular votes, but Bush (thanks to Florida) had more electoral votes. Since Bush had more electoral votes, he was named as the next President. With such a close margin between votes, they had to go back and recount all of the ballets. They noticed that there were some ballots that were not punched in properly. When they found this out, lawyers were called in to start filing lawsuits. Recount, after recounts were going on months after the election. Even some minorities were subjected to show extra identification to vote. Democrats called foul blaming Republicans for this issue. Other than the fact that there were more people in 2000 than 1876, there was more to sway other peoples opinions in different directions. Now, you have the media (T.V. Radio, Etc) who gave the voters their personal opinions on the matter, which made people automatically take sides even if they did not vote or follow the election closely. Same thing would have happened if there were these types of resources in 1876. If FOX news, or CNN stated that most Republicans knew about the intimidating tactics that the southern Democrats used to keep blacks and Republicans away from the polls, there would