Friday December 09, 2016
Why Americans would rather move on than seriously challenge a Presidential vote
more stories from this episode
- The Canadian military is issuing a malaria drug that can produce anxiety, paranoia and psychotic behaviour
- Nordstrom wants to sell you an $85 rock this holiday season
- Should I Read it? The holiday gift guide edition
- Legendary photographer Harry Benson lifts the veil on three of his most iconic shots
- Fake Facebook pages are making money off Standing Rock
- Why Americans would rather move on than seriously challenge a Presidential vote
- Riffed from the headlines for 10/12/2016
- Full Episode
Donald Trump's unexpected victory in the presidential race has raised questions about the electoral college, and the possibility of voter fraud in this year's election.
The results prompted Green Party candidate, Jill Stein to call for vote recounts in three states; Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
This isn't the first time the legitimacy of a U.S. presidency has been called into question.
But, history has shown that rather than seriously challenge the results of these elections, Americans are more willing to accept them and move on.
In 2000, then Vice President Al Gore reluctantly handed the presidency to George W. Bush, after a drawn-out recount in Florida.
Despite the initial furor over the tightest race in U.S. election history, the American public soon settled in with the decision.
So why might this have been the case?
According to Yale history professor Beverly Gage, it boils down to a concern for the greater good of the nation.
"In the end, most Americans decided that it was better to have functioning institutions, to move forward with the elections," Gage told Day 6 host Brent Bambury.