United States presidential election, 2004

United States presidential election, 2004

November 2, 2004

All 538 electoral votes of the Electoral College
270 electoral votes needed to win
Turnout 56.7%[1] 5.5 pp

Nominee George W. Bush John Kerry
Party Republican Democratic
Home state Texas Massachusetts
Running mate Dick Cheney John Edwards
Electoral vote 286[2] 251[2][3]
States carried 31 19 + DC
Popular vote 62,040,610 59,028,444
Percentage 50.7% 48.3%

Presidential election results map. Red denotes states won by Bush/Cheney, blue denotes those won by Kerry/Edwards, light blue is the electoral vote for John Edwards (written as John Ewards) by a Minnesota faithless elector. Numbers indicate electoral votes allotted to the winner of each state.

President before election

George W. Bush

Elected President

George W. Bush

The United States presidential election of 2004, the 55th quadrennial presidential election, was held on Tuesday, November 2, 2004. Incumbent Republican President George W. Bush defeated Democratic nominee John Kerry, a United States Senator from Massachusetts.

Bush and incumbent Vice President Dick Cheney were renominated by their party with no difficulty. Former Governor Howard Dean emerged as the early front-runner in the 2004 Democratic primaries, but Kerry won the first set of primaries in January 2004 and clinched his party's nomination in March after a series of primary victories. Kerry chose Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, who had himself sought the party's 2004 presidential nomination, to be his running mate.

Bush's popularity had soared early in his first term after the September 11 attacks, but his popularity declined between 2001 and 2004. Foreign policy was the dominant theme throughout the election campaign, particularly Bush's conduct of the War on Terrorism and the aftermath of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Bush presented himself as a decisive leader and attacked Kerry as a "flip-flopper", while Kerry criticized Bush's conduct of the Iraq War. Domestic issues were debated as well, including the economy and jobs, health care, and moral values.

Bush won by a slim margin, taking 53% or 286 electoral votes. He swept the South and the Mountain States and took the crucial swing states of Ohio, Iowa, and New Mexico. Some aspects of the election process were subject to controversy, but not to the degree seen in the 2000 presidential election. Bush was the first candidate of either party to win a majority of the popular vote since George H. W. Bush accomplished the same feat in the 1988 election. As of 2016, this remains the only election since 1988 in which the Republican nominee has won the popular vote. His victory also marked the first time that the Republican nominee won a presidential election without carrying any state in the Northeastern United States.


George W. Bush won the presidency in 2000 after the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore remanded the case to the Florida Supreme Court, which declared there was not sufficient time to hold a recount without violating the U.S. Constitution.

Just eight months into his presidency, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, suddenly transformed Bush into a wartime president. Bush's approval ratings surged to near 90%. Within a month, the forces of a coalition led by the United States entered Afghanistan, which had been sheltering Osama bin Laden, suspected mastermind of the September 11 attacks. By December, the Taliban had been removed, although a long and ongoing reconstruction would follow.

The Bush administration then turned its attention to Iraq, and argued the need to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq had become urgent. The Iraq issue gave Bush an antagonist to present to the people, (similar but different than that of 2001). Rallying support against a common enemy rather than gaining voters through ideas or policy.[4] Among the stated reasons were that Saddam's regime had tried to acquire nuclear material and had not properly accounted for biological and chemical material it was known to have previously possessed. Both the possession of these weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and the failure to account for them, would violate the UN sanctions. The assertion about WMD was hotly advanced by the Bush administration from the beginning, but other major powers including China, France, Germany, and Russia remained unconvinced that Iraq was a threat and refused to allow passage of a UN Security Council resolution to authorize the use of force.[5] Iraq permitted UN weapon inspectors in November 2002, who were continuing their work to assess the WMD claim when the Bush administration decided to proceed with war without UN authorization and told the inspectors to leave the country.[6] The United States invaded Iraq on March 20, 2003, along with a "coalition of the willing" that consisted of additional troops from the United Kingdom, and to a lesser extent, from Australia and Poland. Within about three weeks, the invasion caused the collapse of both the Iraqi government and its armed forces. However, the U.S. and allied forces failed to find any weapon of mass destruction in Iraq. Nevertheless, on May 1, George W. Bush landed on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, in a Lockheed S-3 Viking, where he gave a speech announcing the end of "major combat operations" in the Iraq War. Bush's approval rating in May was at 66%, according to a CNNUSA TodayGallup poll.[7] However, Bush's high approval ratings did not last. First, while the war itself was popular in the U.S., the reconstruction and attempted "democratization" of Iraq lost some support as months passed and casualty figures increased, with no decrease in violence nor progress toward stability or reconstruction. Second, as investigators combed through the country, they failed to find the predicted WMD stockpiles, which led to debate over the rationale for the war.


Republican nomination

Republican Party Ticket, 2004
George W. Bush Dick Cheney
for President for Vice President
President of the United States
Vice President of the United States

Bush's popularity rose as a wartime president, and he was able to ward off any serious challenge to the Republican nomination. Senator Lincoln Chafee from Rhode Island considered challenging Bush on an anti-war platform in New Hampshire, but decided not to run after the capture of Saddam Hussein in December 2003.[8]

On March 10, 2004, Bush officially clinched the number of delegates needed to be nominated at the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City. He accepted the nomination on September 2, 2004, and retained Vice President Dick Cheney as his running mate. During the convention and throughout the campaign, Bush focused on two themes: defending America against terrorism and building an ownership society. Bush used populist ideals in an attempt to rally citizens behind him in a time of international terror.[9] The ownership society included allowing people to invest some of their Social Security in the stock market, increasing home and stock ownership, and encouraging more people to buy their own health insurance.[10]

Democratic Party nomination

Democratic Party Ticket, 2004
John Kerry John Edwards
for President for Vice President
U.S. Senator from Massachusetts
U.S. Senator from North Carolina

Withdrawn candidates

Before the primaries

By summer 2003, Howard Dean had become the apparent front-runner for the Democratic nomination, performing strongly in most polls and leading the pack with the largest campaign war chest. His strength as a fund raiser was attributed mainly to his embrace of the Internet for campaigning. The majority of his donations came from individual supporters, who became known as Deanites, or, more commonly, Deaniacs. Generally regarded as a pragmatic centrist during his governorship, Dean emerged during his presidential campaign as a left-wing populist, denouncing the policies of the Bush administration (especially the invasion of Iraq) as well as fellow Democrats, who, in his view, failed to strongly oppose them. Senator Lieberman, a liberal on domestic issues but a hawk on the War on Terror, failed to gain traction with liberal Democratic primary voters.

In September 2003, retired four-star general Wesley Clark announced his intention to run for the Democratic nomination. His campaign focused on themes of leadership and patriotism; early campaign advertisements relied heavily on biography. his late start left him with relatively few detailed policy proposals. This weakness was apparent in his first few debates, although he soon presented a range of position papers, including a major tax-relief plan. Nevertheless, the Democrats did not flock to support his campaign.

In sheer numbers, John Kerry had fewer endorsements than Dean, who was far ahead in the superdelegate race going into the Iowa caucuses in January 2004. However, Kerry led the endorsement races in Iowa, New Hampshire, Arizona, South Carolina, New Mexico, and Nevada. His main perceived weakness was in his neighboring state of New Hampshire and nearly all national polls. Most other states did not have updated polling numbers to give an accurate placing for Kerry's campaign before Iowa. Heading into the primaries, Kerry's campaign was largely seen as being in trouble, particularly after he fired campaign manager Jim Jordan. The key factors enabling it to survive were when fellow Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy assigned Mary Beth Cahill to be the new campaign manager, as well as Kerry's mortgaging his home to lend the money to his campaign (while his wife was a billionaire, campaign finance rules prohibited using one's personal fortune). He also brought on the "magical" Michael Whouley who would be credited with helping bring home the Iowa victory the same as he did in New Hampshire for Al Gore in 2000 against Bill Bradley.

Iowa caucus

By the January 2004 Iowa caucuses, the field had dwindled down to nine candidates, as Bob Graham had dropped out of the race. Howard Dean was a strong front-runner. However, the Iowa caucuses yielded unexpectedly strong results for Democratic candidates Kerry, who earned 38% of the state's delegates, and John Edwards, who took 32%. Dean slipped to 18% and into third place, while Richard Gephardt finished fourth (11%). In the days leading up to the Iowa vote, there was much negative campaigning between the Dean and Gephardt candidacies.

The dismal results caused Gephardt to drop out and later endorse Kerry. Carol Moseley Braun also dropped out, endorsing Howard Dean. Besides the impact of coming in third, Dean was further hurt by a speech that he gave while at a post-caucus rally. He was shouting over the cheers of his enthusiastic audience, but the crowd noise was being filtered out by his unidirectional microphone, leaving only his full-throated exhortations audible to the television viewers. To those at home, he seemed to raise his voice out of sheer emotion. The incessant replaying of the "Dean Scream" by the press became a debate on whether Dean was victimized by media bias. The scream scene was shown approximately 633 times by cable and broadcast news networks in just four days after the incident, an amount not including talk shows and local news broadcasts.[11] However, those in the actual audience that day have insisted that they didn't know about the infamous "scream" until they returned to their hotel rooms and saw it on television.[12]

Kerry had revived his campaign and began using the slogan "Comeback Kerry".

New Hampshire primary

On January 27, Kerry triumphed again, winning the New Hampshire primary. Dean finished second, Clark came in third, and Edwards placed fourth. The largest of the debates was held at Saint Anselm College, where both Kerry and Dean had strong performances.

South Carolina primary

The following week, Edwards won the South Carolina primary and brought home a strong second-place finish in Oklahoma to Clark. Lieberman dropped out of the campaign the following day. Kerry dominated throughout February and his support quickly snowballed as he won caucuses and primaries, taking in wins in Michigan, Washington, Maine, Tennessee; Washington, D.C.; Nevada, Wisconsin, Utah, Hawaii, and Idaho. Clark and Dean dropped out during this time, leaving Edwards as the only real threat to Kerry. Kucinich and Sharpton continued to run despite poor results at the polls.

Super Tuesday

In March's Super Tuesday, Kerry won decisive victories in the California, Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Rhode Island primaries as well as in the Minnesota caucuses. Despite having withdrawn from the race two weeks earlier, Dean won his home state of Vermont. Edwards finished only slightly behind Kerry in Georgia, but after failing to win a single state other than South Carolina, he chose to withdraw from the presidential race. Sharpton followed suit a couple weeks later. Kucinich did not leave the race officially until July.

Democratic National Convention

On July 6, Kerry selected Edwards as his running mate, shortly before the 2004 Democratic National Convention was held later that month in Boston. Days before Kerry announced Edwards as his running mate, Kerry gave a short list of three candidates: Sen. John Edwards, Rep. Dick Gephardt, and Gov. Tom Vilsack. Heading into the convention, the Kerry/Edwards ticket unveiled its new slogan: a promise to make America "stronger at home and more respected in the world." Kerry made his Vietnam War experience the convention's prominent theme. In accepting the nomination, he began his speech with, "I'm John Kerry and I'm reporting for duty." He later delivered what may have been the speech's most memorable line when he said, "the future doesn't belong to fear, it belongs to freedom", a quote that later appeared in a Kerry/Edwards television advertisement.

The keynote address at the convention was delivered by Illinois State Senator (and future president) Barack Obama; the speech was well received, and it elevated Obama's status within the Democratic Party.[13]

Other nominations

There were four other presidential tickets on the ballot in a number of states totaling enough electoral votes to have a theoretical possibility of winning a majority in the Electoral College. They were:

General election campaign

Campaign issues

Bush focused his campaign on national security, presenting himself as a decisive leader and contrasted Kerry as a "flip-flopper." This strategy was designed to convey to American voters the idea that Bush could be trusted to be tough on terrorism while Kerry would be "uncertain in the face of danger." Bush (just as his father did with Michael Dukakis in the 1988 election) also sought to portray Kerry as a "Massachusetts liberal", who was out of touch with mainstream Americans. One of Kerry's slogans was "Stronger at home, respected in the world." This advanced the suggestion that Kerry would pay more attention to domestic concerns; it also encapsulated Kerry's contention that Bush had alienated American allies by his foreign policy.

According to one exit poll, people who voted for Bush cited the issues of terrorism and traditional values as the most important factors in their decision.[15] Kerry supporters cited the war in Iraq, the economy and jobs, and health care.[15]

Over the course of Bush's first term in office, his extremely high approval ratings immediately following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks steadily dwindled, rising only during combat operations in Iraq in spring 2003, and again following the capture of Saddam Hussein in December that same year.[16]

Between August and September 2004, there was an intense focus on events that occurred in the late-1960s and early-1970s. Bush was accused of failing to fulfill his required service in the Texas Air National Guard.[17] However, the focus quickly shifted to the conduct of CBS News after they aired a segment on 60 Minutes Wednesday, introducing what became known as the Killian documents.[18] Serious doubts about the documents' authenticity quickly emerged,[19] leading CBS to appoint a review panel that eventually resulted in the firing of the news producer and other significant staffing changes.[20][21]

Meanwhile, Kerry was accused by the Swift Vets and POWs for Truth, who averred that "phony war crimes charges, his exaggerated claims about his own service in Vietnam, and his deliberate misrepresentation of the nature and effectiveness of Swift boat operations compels us to step forward."[22] The group challenged the legitimacy of each of the combat medals awarded to Kerry by the U.S. Navy, and the disposition of his discharge.

In the beginning of September, the successful Republican National Convention along with the allegations by Kerry's former mates gave Bush his first comfortable margin since Kerry had won the nomination. A post-convention Gallup poll showed the President leading the Senator by 14 points.[23][24]


Three presidential debates and one vice presidential debate were organized by the Commission on Presidential Debates, and held in the autumn of 2004. As expected, these debates set the agenda for the final leg of the political contest. Libertarian Party candidate Michael Badnarik and Green Party candidate David Cobb were arrested while trying to access the debates. Badnarik was attempting to serve papers to the Commission on Presidential Debates.

The first debate was held on September 30 at the University of Miami, moderated by Jim Lehrer of PBS. During the debate, slated to focus on foreign policy, Kerry accused Bush of having failed to gain international support for the invasion of Iraq, saying the only countries assisting the U.S. during the invasion were the United Kingdom and Australia. Bush replied to this by saying, "Well, actually, he forgot Poland." Later, a consensus formed among mainstream pollsters and pundits that Kerry won the debate decisively, strengthening what had come to be seen as a weak and troubled campaign.[25][26] In the days after, coverage focused on Bush's apparent annoyance with Kerry and numerous scowls and negative facial expressions.

On October 5, the vice presidential debate between Cheney and Edwards was held at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, and was moderated by Gwen Ifill of PBS. An initial poll by ABC indicated a victory for Cheney, while polls by CNN and MSNBC gave it to Edwards.[27][28][29][30]

The second presidential debate was held at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, on October 8, moderated by Charles Gibson of ABC. Conducted in a town meeting format, less formal than the first presidential debate, this debate saw Bush and Kerry taking questions on a variety of subjects from a local audience.[31] Bush attempted to deflect criticism of what was described as his scowling demeanor during the first debate, joking at one point about one of Kerry's remarks, "That answer made me want to scowl."[32]

Bush and Kerry met for the third and final debate at Arizona State University on October 13.[33] 51 million viewers watched the debate which was moderated by Bob Schieffer of CBS News. However, at the time of the ASU debate, there were 15.2 million viewers tuned in to watch the Major League Baseball playoffs broadcast simultaneously. After Kerry, responding to a question about gay rights, reminded the audience that Vice President Cheney's daughter was a lesbian, Cheney responded with a statement calling himself "a pretty angry father" due to Kerry using Cheney's daughter's sexual orientation for his political purposes.[34] Polls taken by Gallup in found that Kerry pulled ahead in October, but showed a tight race as the election drew to a close.[35]

Osama bin Laden videotape

On October 29, four days before the election, excerpts of a video of Osama bin Laden addressing the American people were broadcast on al Jazeera. In his remarks, bin Laden mentions the September 11, 2001 attacks and taunted Bush over his response to them. In the days following the video's release, Bush's lead over Kerry increased by several points.[36]

Notable expressions and phrases

  • Bring it on: an expression Kerry used to make the point that he is not afraid of attacks by the George W. Bush campaign.[37][38]
  • Flip-flop: although the term existed prior to the elections, Republicans used it to describe John Kerry after he said "I actually did vote for the $87 billion, before I voted against it."
  • Joementum: used in the primaries by Joe Lieberman to say that he has momentum. It has since been used to ridicule Lieberman, since his campaign did not pick up momentum and he dropped out of the race.
  • Swiftboating: a term used during the campaign to describe the work of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The term has been used since the campaign to describe a harsh attack by a political opponent that is dishonest, personal and unfair.
  • You forgot Poland: paraphrased from Bush's comment in the first debate when he said "Well, actually, he forgot Poland." Used to emphasize that the coalition was not as big as the list suggested because most of the countries in the coalition had a small number of troops.


Presidential candidate Party Home state Popular vote Electoral
Running mate
Count Percentage Vice-presidential candidate Home state Electoral vote
George Walker Bush Republican Texas 62,040,610 50.73% 286 Richard Bruce Cheney Wyoming 286
John Forbes Kerry Democratic Massachusetts 59,028,444 48.27% 251 John Reid Edwards North Carolina 251
John Edwards(a) Democratic North Carolina 1 John Reid Edwards North Carolina 1
Ralph Nader Independent Connecticut 465,650 0.38% 0 Peter Camejo California 0
Michael Badnarik Libertarian Texas 397,265 0.32% 0 Richard Campagna Iowa 0
Michael Peroutka Constitution Maryland 143,630 0.12% 0 Chuck Baldwin Florida 0
David Cobb Green Texas 119,859 0.10% 0 Pat LaMarche Maine 0
Leonard Peltier Peace and Freedom Pennsylvania 27,607 0.02% 0 Janice Jordan California 0
Walt Brown Socialist Oregon 10,837 0.01% 0 Mary Alice Herbert Vermont 0
Róger Calero(b) Socialist Workers New York 3,689 0.01% 0 Arrin Hawkins(b) Minnesota 0
Thomas Harens Christian Freedom Minnesota 2,387 0.002% 0 Jennifer Ryan Minnesota 0
Other 50,652 0.04% Other
Total 122,295,345 100% 538 538
Needed to win 270 270

Source (Electoral and Popular Vote): Federal Elections Commission Electoral and Popular Vote Summary Voting age population: 215,664,000

Percent of voting age population casting a vote for president: 56.70%

(a) One faithless elector from Minnesota cast an electoral vote for John Edwards (written as John Ewards) for president.[39]
(b) Because Arrin Hawkins, then aged 28, was constitutionally ineligible to serve as vice president, Margaret Trowe replaced her on the ballot in some states. James Harris replaced Calero on certain other states' ballots.

Popular vote
Electoral vote

Results by state

The following table records the official vote tallies for each state as reported by the official Federal Election Commission report. The column labeled "Margin" shows Bush's margin of victory over Kerry (the margin is negative for states and districts won by Kerry).

States/districts won by Bush/Cheney
States/districts won by Kerry/Edwards
George W. Bush
John Kerry
Ralph Nader
Independent / Reform
Michael Badnarik
Michael Peroutka
David Cobb
Others Margin State Total
State electoral
# % electoral
# % electoral
# % electoral
# % electoral
# % electoral
# % electoral
# % electoral
# % #
District of Columbia321,2569.34%202,97089.18%31,4850.65%5020.22%00.00%7370.32%6360.28%−181,714−79.84%227,586DC
New Hampshire4331,23748.87%340,51150.24%44,4790.66%3720.05%1610.02%00.00%9780.14%−9,274−1.37%677,738NH
New Jersey151,670,00346.24%1,911,43052.92%1519,4180.54%4,5140.12%2,7500.08%1,8070.05%1,7690.05%−241,427−6.68%3,611,691NJ
New Mexico5376,93049.84%5370,94249.05%4,0530.54%2,3820.31%7710.10%1,2260.16%00.00%5,9880.79%756,304NM
New York312,962,56740.08%4,314,28058.37%3199,8731.35%11,6070.16%2070.00%870.00%2,4150.03%−1,351,713−18.29%7,391,036NY
North Carolina151,961,16656.02%151,525,84943.58%1,8050.05%11,7310.34%00.00%1080.00%3480.01%435,31712.43%3,501,007NC
North Dakota3196,65162.86%3111,05235.50%3,7561.20%8510.27%5140.16%00.00%90.00%85,59927.36%312,833ND
Rhode Island4169,04638.67%259,76559.42%44,6511.06%9070.21%3390.08%1,3330.30%1,0930.25%−90,719−20.75%437,134RI
South Carolina8937,97457.98%8661,69940.90%5,5200.34%3,6080.22%5,3170.33%1,4880.09%2,1240.13%276,27517.08%1,617,730SC
South Dakota3232,58459.91%3149,24438.44%4,3201.11%9640.25%1,1030.28%00.00%00.00%83,34021.47%388,215SD
West Virginia5423,77856.06%5326,54143.20%4,0630.54%1,4050.19%820.01%50.00%130.00%97,23712.86%755,887WV
U.S Total53862,040,61050.73%28659,028,44448.27%251465,1510.38%397,2650.32%143,6300.12%119,8590.10%99,8870.08%3,012,1662.46%122,294,846US

Although Guam has no votes in the Electoral College, they have held a straw poll for their presidential preferences since 1980. In 2004, the results were Bush 21,490 (64.1%), Kerry 11,781 (35.1%), Nader 196 (0.58%) and Badnarik 67 (0.2%).[40]

Maine and Nebraska district results

Maine and Nebraska each allow for their electoral votes to be split between candidates. In both states, two electoral votes are awarded to the winner of the statewide race and one electoral vote is awarded to the winner of each congressional district. The following table records the official presidential vote tallies for Maine and Nebraska's congressional districts.[41][42]

District Electors Bush% Kerry% Nader% Badnarik% Peroutka% Cobb% Other% Margin % Total
Maine's 1st congressional district 1165,82443.14%211,70355.07%4,0041.04%1,0470.27%3460.09%1,4680.38%−45,879−11.94%384,392
Maine's 2nd congressional district 1164,37746.13%185,13951.95%4,0651.14%9180.26%3890.11%1,4680.41%−20,762−5.83%356,356
Nebraska's 1st congressional district 1169,88862.97%96,31435.70%2,0250.75%6560.24%4050.15%4530.17%300.01%73,57427.27%269,771
Nebraska's 2nd congressional district 1153,04160.24%97,85838.52%1,7310.68%8130.32%3050.12%2610.10%230.01%55,18321.72%254,032
Nebraska's 3rd congressional district 1189,88574.92%60,15623.73%1,9420.77%5720.23%6040.24%2640.10%290.01%129,72951.18%253,452

Close states

Red font color denotes those won by Republican President George W. Bush; blue denotes states won by Democrat John Kerry.

States where margin of victory was under 1% (22 electoral votes):

  1. Wisconsin 0.38%
  2. Iowa 0.67%
  3. New Mexico 0.79%

States where margin of victory was under 5% (93 electoral votes):

  1. New Hampshire 1.37%
  2. Ohio 2.11% (tipping point state)
  3. Pennsylvania 2.50%
  4. Nevada 2.59%
  5. Michigan 3.42%
  6. Minnesota 3.48%
  7. Oregon 4.16%
  8. Colorado 4.67%

States where margin of victory was more than 5% but less than 10% (149 electoral votes):

  1. Florida 5.01%
  2. Maine's 2nd Congressional District 5.82%
  3. New Jersey 6.68%
  4. Washington 7.18%
  5. Missouri 7.20%
  6. Delaware 7.59%
  7. Virginia 8.20%
  8. Hawaii 8.74%
  9. Maine 9.00%
  10. Arkansas 9.76%
  11. California 9.95%

Notes on results

Bush received 62,040,610 popular votes compared to Kerry's 59,028,444.

Because of a request by Ralph Nader, New Hampshire held a recount. In New York, Bush obtained 2,806,993 votes on the Republican ticket and 155,574 on the Conservative Party ticket. Kerry obtained 4,180,755 votes on the Democratic ticket and 133,525 votes on the Working Families ticket. Nader obtained 84,247 votes on the Independence ticket, and 15,626 votes on the Peace and Justice ticket.

Note also: Official Federal Election Commission Report, with the latest, most final, and complete vote totals available.


Source: FEC[43]

2004 United States Electoral College

Ballot access

Presidential ticket Party Ballot access
Bush / Cheney Republican 50+DC
Kerry / Edwards Democrat 50+DC
Badnarik / Campagna Libertarian 48+DC
Peroutka / Baldwin Constitution 36
Nader / Camejo Independent, Reform 34+DC
Cobb / LaMarche Green 27+DC

Faithless elector in Minnesota

One elector in Minnesota cast a ballot for president with the name of "John Ewards" [sic] written on it.[44] The Electoral College officials certified this ballot as a vote for John Edwards for president. The remaining nine electors cast ballots for John Kerry. All ten electors in the state cast ballots for John Edwards for vice president (John Edwards's name was spelled correctly on all ballots for vice president).[45] This was the first time in U.S. history that an elector had cast a vote for the same person to be both president and vice president.

Electoral balloting in Minnesota was performed by secret ballot, and none of the electors admitted to casting the Edwards vote for president, so it may never be known who the faithless elector was. It is not even known whether the vote for Edwards was deliberate or unintentional; the Republican Secretary of State and several of the Democratic electors have expressed the opinion that this was an accident.[46]

Electoral vote error in New York

New York's initial electoral vote certificate indicated that all of its 31 electoral votes for president were cast for "John L. Kerry of Massachusetts" instead of John F. Kerry, who won the popular vote in the state.[47] This was apparently the result of a typographical error, and an amended electoral vote certificate with the correct middle initial was transmitted to the President of the Senate prior to the official electoral vote count.[48]


Electoral College changes from 2000

With the completion of the 2000 census, Congressional reapportionment took place, moving some representative districts from the slowest growing states to the fastest growing. As a result, several states had a different number of electors in the U.S. Electoral College in 2004 than in 2000, since the number of electors allotted to each state is equal to the sum of the number of Senators and Representatives from that state.

The following table shows the change in electors from the 2000 election. Red states represent those won by Bush; and blue states, those won by both Gore and Kerry. All states except Nebraska and Maine use a winner-take-all allocation of electors. Each of these states was won by the same party in 2004 that had won it in 2000; thus, George W. Bush received a net gain of seven electoral votes due to reapportionment while the Democrats lost the same amount.

Gained votes Lost votes
  •      Arizona (8→10 +2)
  •      Florida (25→27 +2)
  •      Georgia (13→15 +2)
  •      Texas (32→34 +2)
  •      California (54→55 +1)
  •      Colorado (8→9 +1)
  •      North Carolina (14→15 +1)
  •      Nevada (4→5 +1)
  •      New York (33→31 -2)
  •      Pennsylvania (23→21 -2)
  •      Connecticut (8→7 -1)
  •      Mississippi (7→6 -1)
  •      Ohio (21→20 -1)
  •      Oklahoma (8→7 -1)
  •      Wisconsin (11→10 -1)
  •      Illinois (22→21 -1)
  •      Indiana (12→11 -1)
  •      Michigan (18→17 -1)

(This table uses the currently common Red→Republican, Blue→Democratic color association, as do the maps on this page. Some older party-affiliation maps use the opposite color-coding for historical reasons.)

Voter demographics

The 2004 presidential vote by demographic subgroup
Demographic subgroup Kerry Bush Other % of
total vote
Total vote 48 51 1 100
Liberals 85 13 1 21
Moderates 54 45 1 45
Conservatives 15 84 1 34
Democrats 89 11 0 37
Republicans 6 93 1 37
Independents 49 48 3 26
Men 44 55 1 46
Women 51 48 1 54
Marital status
Married 42 57 3 63
Non-married 58 40 2 37
White 41 58 1 77
Black 88 11 1 11
Asian 56 44 0 2
Other 54 40 6 2
Hispanic 53 44 3 8
Protestant 40 59 1 54
Catholic 47 52 1 27
Jewish 74 25 1 3
Other 74 23 3 7
None 67 31 2 10
Religious service attendance
More than weekly 35 64 1 16
Weekly 41 58 1 26
Monthly 49 50 1 14
A few times a year 54 45 1 28
Never 62 36 2 15
White evangelical or born-again Christian?
White evangelical or born-again Christian 21 78 1 23
Everyone else 56 43 1 77
18–29 years old 54 45 1 17
30–44 years old 46 53 1 29
45–59 years old 48 51 1 30
60 and older 46 54 0 24
First time voter?
First time voter 53 46 1 11
Everyone else 48 51 1 89
Sexual orientation
Gay, lesbian, or bisexual 77 23 0 4
Heterosexual 46 53 1 96
Not a high school graduate 50 49 1 4
High school graduate 47 52 1 22
Some college education 46 54 0 32
College graduate 46 52 2 26
Postgraduate education 55 44 1 16
Family income
Under $15,000 63 36 1 8
$15,000–30,000 57 42 1 15
$30,000–50,000 50 49 1 22
$50,000–75,000 43 56 1 23
$75,000–100,000 45 55 0 14
$100,000–150,000 42 57 1 11
$150,000–200,000 42 58 0 4
Over $200,000 35 63 2 3
Union households
Union 59 40 1 24
Non-union 44 55 1 76
Military service
Veterans 41 57 2 18
Non-veterans 50 49 1 82
Northeast 56 43 1 22
Midwest 48 51 1 26
South 42 58 0 32
West 50 49 1 20
Community size
Urban 54 45 1 30
Suburban 47 52 1 46
Rural 42 57 1 25

Source: CNN exit poll (13,660 surveyed)[52]

Battleground states

During the campaign and as the results came in on the night of the election there was much focus on Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. These three swing states were seen as evenly divided, and with each casting 20 electoral votes or more, they had the power to decide the election. As the final results came in, Kerry took Pennsylvania and then Bush took Florida, focusing all attention on Ohio.

The morning after the election, the major candidates were neck and neck. It was clear that the result in Ohio, along with two other states who had still not declared (New Mexico and Iowa), would decide the winner. Bush had established a lead of around 130,000 votes but the Democrats pointed to provisional ballots that had yet to be counted, initially reported to number as high as 200,000. Bush had preliminary leads of less than 5% of the vote in only four states, but if Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico had all eventually gone to Kerry, a win for Bush in Ohio would have created a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. The result of an electoral tie would cause the election to be decided in the House of Representatives with each state casting one vote, regardless of population. Such a scenario would almost certainly have resulted in a victory for Bush, as Republicans controlled more House delegations. Therefore, the outcome of the election hinged solely on the result in Ohio, regardless of the final totals elsewhere. In the afternoon Ohio's Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell, announced that it was statistically impossible for the Democrats to make up enough valid votes in the provisional ballots to win. At the time provisional ballots were reported as numbering 140,000 (and later estimated to be only 135,000). Faced with this announcement, John Kerry conceded defeat.

The upper Midwest bloc of Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin is also notable, casting a sum of 27 electoral votes. The following is list of the states considered swing states in the 2004 election by most news organizations and which candidate they eventually went for. The two major parties chose to focus their advertising on these states:



Election controversy

After the election, some sources reported indications of possible data irregularities and systematic flaws during the voting process.

Although the overall result of the election was not challenged by the Kerry campaign, Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb and Libertarian Party presidential candidate Michael Badnarik obtained a recount in Ohio. This recount was completed December 28, 2004, although on January 24, 2007, a jury convicted two Ohio elections officials of selecting precincts to recount where they already knew the hand total would match the machine total, thereby avoiding having to perform a full recount.[54]

At the official counting of the electoral votes on January 6, a motion was made contesting Ohio's electoral votes. Because the motion was supported by at least one member of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, election law mandated that each house retire to debate and vote on the motion. In the House of Representatives, the motion was supported by 31 Democrats. It was opposed by 178 Republicans, 88 Democrats and one independent. Not voting were 52 Republicans and 80 Democrats.[55] Four people elected to the House had not yet taken office, and one seat was vacant. In the Senate, it was supported only by its maker, Senator Barbara Boxer, with 74 Senators opposed and 25 not voting. During the debate, no Senator argued that the outcome of the election should be changed by either court challenge or revote. Senator Boxer claimed that she had made the motion not to challenge the outcome, but to "shed the light of truth on these irregularities."

Kerry would later state that "the widespread irregularities make it impossible to know for certain that the [Ohio] outcome reflected the will of the voters." In the same article, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said "I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided... We know that there was substantial voter suppression, and the machines were not reliable. It should not be a surprise that the Republicans are willing to do things that are unethical to manipulate elections. That's what we suspect has happened."[56]

Points of controversy

  • There is no individual federal agency with direct regulatory authority of the U.S. voting machine industry.[57] However the Election Assistance Commission has full regulatory authority over federal testing and certification processes, as well as an influential advisory role in certain voting industry matters.[58] Further oversight authority belongs to the Government Accountability Office, regularly investigating voting system related issues.[59]
  • The Ohio Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell, who simultaneously served as co-chair of the 2004 Republican Presidential Campaign, came under fire for failing to uphold his legal obligation to investigate potential voter fraud, manipulation, and irregularities, in a 100-page report by the Congressional Judiciary Committee.
  • The former president of Diebold Election Systems (Bob Urosevich) and the vice president of customer support at Election Systems & Software (Todd Urosevich) are brothers.[60]
  • Walden O'Dell the former CEO of Diebold (the parent company of voting machine manufacturer Diebold Election Systems) was an active fundraiser for George W. Bush's re-election campaign and wrote in a fund-raising letter dated August 13, 2003, that he was committed "to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President."[61]
  • Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, who was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice-presidential candidates,[62][63] served as the chairman of ES&S in the early 1990s when it operated under the name American Information Systems Inc. (AIS).[64] ES&S voting machines tabulated 85 percent of the votes cast in Hagel's 2002 and 1996 election races. In 2003 Hagel disclosed a financial stake in McCarthy Group Inc., the holding company of ES&S.[64]
  • Global Election Systems, which was purchased by Diebold Election Systems and developed the core technology behind the company's voting machines and voter registration system, employed five convicted felons as consultants and developers.[65]
  • Jeff Dean, a former senior vice-president of Global Election Systems when it was bought by Diebold, had previously been convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree. Bev Harris reports Dean was retained as a consultant by Diebold Election Systems,[66] though Diebold has disputed the consulting relationship.[65] Dean was convicted of theft via "alteration of records in the computerized accounting system" using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years.[66]
  • International election observers were barred from the polls in Ohio[67][68] by then Republican Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. Blackwell's office argues this was the correct interpretation of Ohio law.[68]
  • California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley decertified all Diebold Election Systems touch-screen voting machines due to computer-science reports released detailing design and security concerns.[69][70]
  • 30% of all U.S. votes cast in the 2004 election were cast on direct-recording electronic (DRE) voting machine, which do not print individual paper records of each vote.[71]
  • Numerous statistical analyses showed "discrepancy in the number of votes Bush received in counties that used the touch-screen machines and counties that used other types of voting equipment" as well as discrepancies with exit polls, favoring President George W. Bush.[72][73][74][75][76][77][78]

New during this campaign

International observers

At the invitation of the United States government, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) sent a team of observers to monitor the presidential elections in 2004. It was the first time the OSCE had sent observers to a U.S. presidential election, although they had been invited in the past.[79] In September 2004 the OSCE issued a report on U.S. electoral processes[80][81] and the election final report.[82] The report reads: "The November 2, 2004 elections in the United States mostly met the OSCE commitments included in the 1990 Copenhagen Document. They were conducted in an environment that reflects a long-standing democratic tradition, including institutions governed by the rule of law, free and generally professional media, and a civil society intensively engaged in the election process. There was exceptional public interest in the two leading presidential candidates and the issues raised by their respective campaigns, as well as in the election process itself."

Earlier, some 13 U.S. Representatives from the Democratic Party had sent a letter to United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan asking for the UN to monitor the elections. The UN responded that such a request could only come from the official national executive. The move was met with opposition from some Republican lawmakers.[83] The OSCE is not affiliated with the United Nations.

Electronic voting

For 2004, some states expedited the implementation of electronic voting systems for the election, raising several issues:

  • Software. Without proper testing and certification, critics believe electronic voting machines could produce an incorrect report due to malfunction or deliberate manipulation.[84]
  • Recounts. A recount of an electronic voting machine is not a recount in the traditional sense. The machine can be audited for irregularities and voting totals stored on multiple backup devices can be compared, but vote counts will not change.
  • Partisan ties. Democrats noted the Republican or conservative ties of several leading executives in the companies providing the machines.[85]

Campaign law changes

The 2004 election was the first to be affected by the campaign finance reforms mandated by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (also known as the McCainFeingold Bill for its sponsors in the United States Senate). Because of the Act's restrictions on candidates' and parties' fundraising, a large number of so-called 527 groups emerged. Named for a section of the Internal Revenue Code, these groups were able to raise large amounts of money for various political causes as long as they do not coordinate their activities with political campaigns. Examples of 527s include Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, MoveOn.org, the Media Fund, and America Coming Together. Many such groups were active throughout the campaign season (there was some similar activity, although on a much lesser scale, during the 2000 campaign).

To distinguish official campaigning from independent campaigning, political advertisements on television were required to include a verbal disclaimer identifying the organization responsible for the advertisement. Advertisements produced by political campaigns usually included the statement, "I'm [candidate's name], and I approve this message." Advertisements produced by independent organizations usually included the statement, "[Organization name] is responsible for the content of this advertisement", and from September 3 (60 days before the general election), such organizations' ads were prohibited from mentioning any candidate by name. Previously, television advertisements only required a written "paid for by" disclaimer on the screen.

This law was not well known or widely publicized at the beginning of the Democratic primary season, which led to some early misperception of Howard Dean, who was the first candidate to buy television advertising in this election cycle. Not realizing that the law required the phrasing, some people viewing the ads reportedly questioned why Dean might say such a thing—such questions were easier to ask because of the maverick nature of Dean's campaign in general.

Colorado's Amendment 36

A ballot initiative in Colorado, known as Amendment 36, would have changed the way in which the state apportions its electoral votes. Rather than assigning all 9 of the state's electors to the candidate with a plurality of popular votes, under the amendment Colorado would have assigned presidential electors proportionally to the statewide vote count, which would be a unique system (Nebraska and Maine assign electoral votes based on vote totals within each congressional district). Opponents claimed that this splitting would diminish Colorado's influence in the Electoral College, and the amendment ultimately failed, receiving only 34% of the vote.

See also

Other elections


  1. "Voter Turnout in Presidential Elections". Presidency.ucsb.edu. Retrieved 2016-08-18.
  2. 1 2 "Federal Elections 2004: Election Results for the U.S. President, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives" (PDF). Federal Election Commission. May 2005. Retrieved November 20, 2012.
  3. One Minnesota elector voted for Edwards for both president and vice president. During the counting of the vote in Congress, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) raised objections to the Ohio Certificate of Vote alleging that the votes were not regularly given. Both houses voted to override the objection, 74 to 1 in the Senate and 267 to 31 in the House of Representatives. See 2004 presidential election results from the National Archives and Records Administration.
  4. Kazin, Michael (1995). The Populist Persuasion. Cornell University.
  5. Tagliabue, John (March 5, 2003). "France, Germany and Russia Vow to Stop Use of Force Against Iraq". The New York Times.
  6. "U.S advises weapons inspectors to leave Iraq". USA Today. March 17, 2003.
  7. "Bush Jumpstarts '04 Fundraising, Says Collecting Campaign Cash Now Will Keep War On Terror Focused". CBS News. May 24, 2003. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  8. Lincoln Chafee, Against the Tide (2007), pp. 119–20
  9. Brownstein, Ronald (2004-02-15). "A Bush-Kerry Fight to Define Populism". Los Angeles Times. ISSN 0458-3035. Retrieved 2017-11-15.
  10. writer, by Mark Gongloff, CNN/Money senior. "Bush to push ownership society - Sep. 2, 2004". money.cnn.com. Retrieved 2017-11-16.
  11. "The scream that left us blind". Loyola Phoenix. 11 February 2004. Archived from the original on October 17, 2007. Retrieved November 27, 2006.
  12. Salzman, Eric (January 26, 2004). "Dean's Scream: Not What It Seemed". CBS News. Retrieved November 27, 2006.
  13. Bernstein, David (June 2007). "The Speech". Chicago Magazine. Retrieved April 13, 2008.
  14. "2004 Presidential Election by State", The Green Papers.
  15. 1 2 "Decision 2004 – Exit poll". MSNBC. Retrieved June 5, 2008.
  16. "Historical Bush Approval Ratings". Hist.umn.edu. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  17. "Bush fell short on duty at Guard". Boston Globe. September 8, 2004. Retrieved June 16, 2007.
  18. "CBS 60 Minutes Wednesday transcript" (PDF). Thornburgh-Boccardi Report, Exhibit 1B. September 8, 2004. Retrieved June 16, 2007.
  19. Michael Dobbs and Mike Allen (September 9, 2004). "Some Question Authenticity of Papers on Bush". Washington Post. Retrieved June 16, 2007.
  20. "Thornburgh-Boccardi report" (PDF). CBS News. Retrieved June 16, 2007.
  21. "Final Figure in '60 Minutes' Scandal Resigns". Fox News. Associated Press. March 25, 2005. Retrieved June 16, 2007.
  22. "Election of 2004". Retrieved 2017-11-15.
  23. "RealClear Politics – Polls". Realclearpolitics.com. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  24. "RealClear Politics – Polls". Realclearpolitics.com. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  25. "Poll: Kerry Wins Debate, Pulls Even". msnbc.com. October 4, 2004. Archived from the original on September 10, 2007. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  26. Stevenson, Richard W.; Rutenberg, Jim (2004-07-06). "THE 2004 CAMPAIGN: THE STRATEGY; Bush Campaign Sees an Opportunity for Attack in Kerry's Overtures to McCain". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2017-11-15.
  27. "Dick Cheney Debate With John Edwards Polls Give It To Edwards". s5000.com. 6 October 2004. Archived from the original on September 28, 2007. Retrieved May 24, 2010.
  28. "US running mates clash over Iraq". BBC. October 6, 2004. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  29. Sandalow, Marc (October 5, 2004). "Edwards-Cheney debate: wide audience expected: Tight race makes VP matchup more compelling". San Francisco Chronicle. Archived from the original on October 29, 2004.
  30. Langer, Gary; Sussman, Dalia (October 6, 2004). "Cheney Gains With Help From His Friends". ABC News. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  31. "US debate: What the commentators said". BBC. October 9, 2004. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  32. Fornek, Scott (October 9, 2004). "Bush, Kerry make draft, tax pledges". Chicago Sun-Times. Archived from the original on October 11, 2004.
  33. "Transcript & Video: Third Debate – You Decide 2004". Fox News. October 14, 2004. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  34. Vanden Brook, Tom (October 14, 2004). "Kerry lesbian remark angers Cheneys". USA Today. Retrieved October 5, 2012.
  35. "Gallup Presidential Election Trial-Heat Trends, 1936-2008". Gallup. Retrieved 11 January 2018.
  36. Sherwell, Philip (October 31, 2004). "Bush takes a six-point lead after new bin Laden tape". The Daily Telegraph. London. Archived from the original on December 6, 2008. Retrieved October 5, 2012.
  37. Safire, William (Feb 29, 2004). "On Language; Bring it On!". New York Times. Retrieved 2017-04-28.
  38. Crowley, Michael (May 28, 2004). "John Kerry's Long Shortlist". Slate. Retrieved 2017-04-28.
  39. "MPR: Minnesota elector gives Edwards a vote; Kerry gets other nine". News.minnesota.publicradio.org. Retrieved May 5, 2009.
  40. "2004 Presidential Vote". Ballot-Access.org. December 12, 2004. Retrieved September 17, 2008.
  41. "Maine Certificate of Ascertaiment, 2004 Presidential Election".
  42. "Nebraska Certificate of Ascertainment, 2004 Presidential Election".
  43. "Search Campaign Finance Summary Data". Fec.gov. Archived from the original on October 6, 2008. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  44. Freddoso, David (21 December 2004). "Does L Stand For Loser". National Review. Retrieved 11 April 2015.
  45. Radio, Minnesota Public. "MPR: Minnesota elector gives Edwards a vote; Kerry gets other nine".
  46. Minnesota Public Radio: Minnesota elector gives Edwards a vote; Kerry gets other nine
  47. "NARA Federal Register U. S. Electoral College 2004 Certificate". Archives.gov. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  48. "NARA Federal Register U. S. Electoral College 2004 Certificate". Archives.gov. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  49. ""Turnout Exceeds Optimistic Predictions: More Than 122 Million Vote", Press Release, Center for the Study of the American Electorate, issued January 14, 2005" (PDF). Center for the Study of the American Electorate. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 16, 2008. Retrieved November 11, 2008.
  50. ""2004 Election Results", FEC formal publication" (PDF). fec.gov. Retrieved November 11, 2008.
  51. Bishop, Bill; Cushing, Robert (February 29, 2008). "The Big Sort: Migration, Economy and Politics in the United States of 'Those People'" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on June 24, 2008.
  52. "CNN.com Election 2004". CNN. Retrieved January 2, 2018.
  53. "Travels of Vice President Dick Cheney-October 2004". Gwu.edu. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  54. Kropko, M.R. (January 24, 2007). "Election Staff Convicted in Recount Rig". Washington Post. Retrieved May 26, 2010.
  55. "Final Vote Results for Roll Call 7". Clerk.house.gov. January 6, 2005. Retrieved May 24, 2010.
  56. Kennedy, Robert F. "Was the 2004 Election Stolen? : Rolling Stone". Rollingstone.com. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  57. U.S. GAO. (March 13, 2001). Elections: The Scope of Congressional Authority in Election Administration (GAO-01-470). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved February 10, 2008.
  58. U.S. Election Assistance Commission (January 11, 2007). "EAC Statement Regarding Partisan Political Activities by Voting Machine Manufacturers and Testing Labs and their Employees". Archived from the original (PDF) on February 7, 2008. Retrieved February 10, 2008.
  59. Government Accountability Office election related reports Archived May 20, 2008, at the Wayback Machine.
  60. "Private Company Still 'Controls' Election Outcome". americanfreepress.net. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  61. Paul R. La Monica (August 30, 2004). "The trouble with e-voting". CNN/Money. Retrieved October 23, 2006.
  62. "The Maverick on Bush's Short List – Business loves Hagel—even if the GOP doesn't always". BusinessWeek. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  63. "Vice president Chuck Hagel?". Grand Island Independent. May 27, 2000. Archived from the original on August 19, 2007. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  64. 1 2 Bolton, Alexander (January 29, 2003). "Hagel's ethics filings pose disclosure issue". The Hill. Archived from the original on April 1, 2003.
  65. 1 2 "Con Job at Diebold Subsidiary". Wired.com. December 17, 2003. Archived from the original on April 26, 2008. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  66. 1 2 "Bev Harris: Embezzler Programmed Voting System". Scoop Independent News. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  67. Mark, Jason (October 26, 2004). "Election Officials in Ohio and Florida Fail to Give Poll Access to International Election Observers". Global Exchange. Archived from the original on December 27, 2007. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  68. 1 2 "Foreign observers banned by Blackwell". The Enquirer. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  69. "California Bans E-Vote Machines". Wired. April 30, 2004. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  70. "California official seeks criminal probe of e-voting". MSNBC. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  71. "E-Voting: Is The Fix In?". CBS News. July 28, 2004. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  72. "Researchers: Florida Vote Fishy". Wired. November 18, 2004. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  73. "Votergate 2004? – Research Studies Uncover Potential Massive Election Fraud". Yurica Report: News Intelligence Analysis. Archived from the original on January 3, 2008. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  74. "Complete US Exit Poll Data Confirms Net Suspicions". Scoop Independent News. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  75. "University researchers challenge Bush win in Florida: 'Something went awry with electronic voting in Florida,' says the lead researcher". ComputerWorld. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  76. "Evidence Mounts That The Vote May Have Been Hacked". CommonDreams.org. Archived from the original on December 10, 2007. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  77. "Bush's 'Incredible' Vote Tallies". consortiumnews.com. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  78. "National Election Data Archive". ElectionArchive.org. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  79. "Interactive White House Home Page". Whitehouse.gov. Retrieved November 3, 2008.
  80. "Microsoft Word – US NAM Report, 28 Sep 2004.doc" (PDF). Retrieved May 24, 2010.
  81. Renvert, Nicole (October 14, 2004). "Election 2004 – In The Eyes of the Beholders: OSCE Election Observers Will Oversee the U.S. Presidential Election". American Institute for Contemporary German Studies. Johns Hopkins University. Archived from the original on October 22, 2004.
  82. "XI" (PDF). Retrieved May 24, 2010.
  83. Washington Times August 6, 2004
  84. "Bruce Schneier: The Problem with Electronic Voting Machines, November 2004". Schneier.com. Retrieved May 24, 2010.
  85. Warner, Melanie. "Machine Politics in the Digital Age." New York Times. November 9, 2003.


  • Official Federal Election Commission Report, a PDF file, with the latest, most final, and complete vote totals available.
  • "Presidential Results by Congressional District". Polidata. Washington, D.C.: Polidata. Retrieved July 29, 2005. 
  • Barone, Michael J. The Almanac of American Politics: 2006 (2005)
  • Daclon, Corrado Maria, US elections and war on terrorism (2004), Analisi Difesa, no. 50
  • Evan Thomas, Eleanor Clift, and Staff of Newsweek. Election 2004 (2005)


  • Ceaser, James W. and Andrew E. Busch. Red Over Blue: The 2004 Elections and American Politics (2005), narrative history.
  • Greene, John C. and Mark J. Rozell, eds. The Values Campaign?: The Christian Right and the 2004 Elections (2006).
  • Miller, Mark Crispin. Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election (2005) –
  • Sabato, Larry J. Divided States of America: The Slash And Burn Politics of the 2004 Presidential Election (2005).
  • Stempel III, Guido H. and Thomas K. Hargrove, eds. The 21st-Century Voter: Who Votes, How They Vote, and Why They Vote (2 vol. 2015).

Further reading

Official candidate websites

Election maps and analysis

State-by-state forecasts of electoral vote outcome


Election campaign funding

Campaign ads

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.