for whom the word "likeable" would not be the first to come to mind. The more accurate comparison with the election of 2000 would be that of 1988, when a Vice President who had served two terms under a successful president attempted (in that case, successfully) to extend the term of party rule, as was the case in 2000; in both cases, both candidates of both parties were not really first-rate individuals, and the result was a one-term presidency in 1988 and likely the same thing in 2000 regardless of which individual eventually occupies the White House.
That said, it is also highly likely that the election of 2000 will occupy a very prominent place in American political history books long after the election of 1984 is remembered only by historians. The election of 2000 features the first time in 124 years that the candidate who won the national popular vote looks likely to lose the electoral vote that would put him in office, and could possibly become the first election in 176 years to end up being determined by a vote of the U.S. House of Representatives, should the slate of electors in Florida not be finally determined, or be contested as to legitimacy, by either political party at the time they are to meet and vote in the Electoral College on the coming December 18 (Conason, 1).
Ultimately, the question about the meaning of the 2000 election will only find an answer in hindsight. Whether it is the crowning achievement of a 30 year struggle by the forces of modern American conservatism, or the first political response to an industrial and social revolution as profound as that of the nineteenth century only time will tell (Conason, 3).
Republican President Ronald Reagan was running for re-election in 1984, having defeated Democratic President Jimmy Carter in 1980. Reagan, a former Hollywood actor and former Democrat, had first become nationally prominent politically as a supporter of Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presiden...