This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Bush family (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bush family, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Bush familyWikipedia:WikiProject Bush familyTemplate:WikiProject Bush familyBush family Elections and Referendums This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums United States: Presidential elections High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as High-importance). Politics: American Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Top-importance).

The source used for this and most American presidential election pages is this webpage, which is an "information source for the United States electoral system" maintained by a professor at the University of Florida. It states that the turnout for 1996 is "51.7%" and for 2000 is "54.2%." The change marker reflects that with it going up 2.5 pp.

However, the source used for the 1996 Election Page is this PDF webpage, which is a document from the Federal Election Commission. It states that the percentage of voters was "48.99%," and there is a corresponding document for 2000, which indicates that the total percentage of voters is "51.21%."

It seems that the turnout from the electproject.org is different from the turnout from the FEC. All the available reports, which are only from 1982 to 2002, are different, which has caused a discrepancy between the two pages and with the change marker from 2.5 pp to 5.2 pp, which has lead a bit of editing conflicts due to the differing numbers. 2002crash1 (talk) 05:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

51.21 minus 48.99 = 2.22. Where does 5.2 come from? Jeff in CA (talk) 05:56, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

54.2 - 48.99 = 5.21. 2002crash1 (talk) 06:29, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So each of the two sources is internally consistent, with each approximating about a 2.4 pp increase. However, this article chooses to mix them up and use externally inconsistent results to arrive at 5.2 pp. Up is down. Jeff in CA (talk) 01:04, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect 2000 U.S. presidental campaign has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 9 § 2000 U.S. presidental campaign until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 02:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Donald Trump poses for a portrait December 15, 1996 at his office in New York City.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:21, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He won over 5% in several states, and was technically considered a spoiler candidate, I’d say for the time being he should be included, even if the threshold is 5% of the vote, he made an incredibly important impact to elections in 2000. Gmat605 (talk) 15:52, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no no no. This is the standard in every election. If you put candidates who got over 5% in several states in wikiboxs, you end up with TONS of candidates in wikiboxs. Thats not uncommon Pencilceaser123 (talk) 21:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was added to the uk 2017 election my guy. Gmat605 (talk) 16:25, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The UK 2017 election was a parliamentary one. Parties there are included in the infobox based on their seat count, not on their % figure (you can see this in the multiple discussions that UK elections have had over the years). For US presidential elections there is a rough consensus for only including candidates that get above the 5% threshold overall: Nader barely hit half that figure. Impru20^talk 18:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parliamentary systems and presidential system wikiboxes work differently. To be honest I do have problems with how parliamentary systems wikiboxes are done. But that doesn't mean anything Pencilceaser123 (talk) 04:44, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to add that this little editing war is not funny and it's a little cringe honestly. UK and German elections are parliamentary and they are different from US Presidential elections. This is the same system we have in place for all the different years we should not change it because of something subjective. If a candidate does not get over 5% of the PV then they are not included in the infobox. End of story. If you don't like it go complain somewhere else and get it changed for all the other elections. (eye)rizz (talk) 04:34, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

5% of popular vote or winning a state* Pencilceaser123 (talk) 04:43, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well no not technically, if I remember correctly there was a discussion about this in the 1960 presidential election wikipedia page, since unpledged electors voted for Harry Byrd and won some states in the south. But feel free to correct me if I'm wrong! I'm not sure. (eye)rizz (talk) 04:44, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that one was that harry byrd didnt run in any state. It was via unpledged electors (some of whom voted for kennedy), so thats what the argument about him in the wikibox was about. Storm Thurmon on the other hand only got 2.4% of the popular vote yet one several states so gets on the ballot. Pencilceaser123 (talk) 04:46, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait yeah fair enough! You're totally right (eye)rizz (talk) 14:37, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know. I think the requirements is either 5% or have at least 1 pledged elector. So, Strom Thurmond would be on the infobox because he has at least one pledged elector. Breck0530 (talk) 02:23, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The rule is: if the 3rd party candidate won 5% or more of the popular vote overall, the get to be in the Infobox. The only exception is where they have to win at least 1 state (e.g - Strom Thurmond with 2.41% in 1948), which for Nader’s case, did not do so. GuyMan529 (talk) 17:24, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree! Breck0530 (talk) 17:31, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bush won 30 states while Gore won 20 + DC 2600:100E:B21E:CE07:5038:19DA:2B62:3CE7 (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected states carried Empi1513 (talk) 21:06, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The total popular vote listed in end U.S. presidential ticket box is 105,421,423. However, the numbers listed in the ticket box row templates do not sum to this amount. The correct sum is 105,405,100, which matches the total found in the "Results by state" table and the referenced FEC file ([1]).
• Could someone please clarify where the 105,421,423 figure originates? This might be the relevant edit [2].
• Additionally, while I have not manually verified the source data for other years, my calculations suggest that the popular vote totals may also be incorrect in the articles for the following election years: 1852, 1864, 1884, 1896, 1944, 1948, 1960, 1980, 1984, and 1992.

Orias (talk) 14:58, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]