1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
harkovskaia [24]
4 years ago
13

The outcome of the 2000 presidential election was decided by

History
1 answer:
amm18124 years ago
4 0
It was decided by a decision of the Supreme Court.

 
However, the court did not decide who won, but it decided to stop the manual re-count of votes in Florida, as it was deemed unconstitutional.

After the decision of the Supreme court, the outcome was decided by the electoral votes who were in favour of George Bush. 
You might be interested in
The united states is located south of Canada and north of Mexico this is an example of what
AfilCa [17]

Answer:

united states

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
How were the results of the tinker and hazelwood cases different?
Alex Ar [27]
It is on Google give me a lot of points please
3 0
3 years ago
¿Que regulaba la vida juridica de los novohispanos? a) El Ayuntamiento b) La Audiencia c) El visitador
Charra [1.4K]

Answer:

B

Explanation:

La Audiencia

5 0
3 years ago
Why did Japan enter a period of isolation ? Please explain clearly ! Thanks brainly students ! :D
lozanna [386]
Japan entered a time of Isolation around the 1600s for 200 years aka Sakoku (which means sealed/closed or locked country in Japanese:D ). 

The reason for this goes back when Commodore Perry, who I think was an American came and interacted with them that resulted in the English, Spanish, and Portuguese coming to trade with them. At first, the Japanese were glad because they received a lot of new tech things that they did not have before such as clocks and much more. But then missionaries started pouring in and at first, the Japanese were fine with it but when a lot of Japanese people started converting to Christianity, the Daimyo of Japan at that time say a threat to his power and the unity of the people so he made a decision to kick out all westerners and close the borders. This resulted in the 200 years of isolation but they were not completely isolated because they kept one shipping port open and that was ONLY to trade with the Portuguese, Chinese, and Koreans. 

This is pretty much the basic details of what I can tell you but I hope that you learned something from this:) <span />
7 0
3 years ago
The leaders of the US, USSR, and Great Britain said they wanted to cooperate, so why were negotiations at the Yalta and Potsdam
Maksim231197 [3]

Answer:  Each country had its own agenda about the post-war world.

Context/explanation:

Churchill in particular, along with Roosevelt, pushed strongly for Stalin to allow free elections to take place in the nations of Europe after the war. At that time Stalin agreed, but there was a strong feeling by the other leaders that he might renege on that promise. The Soviets never did allow those free elections to occur. Later, Winston Churchill wrote, "Our hopeful assumptions were soon to be falsified." Stalin and the Soviets felt they needed the Eastern European nations as satellites to protect their own interests.   So one key point of disagreement between Stalin and the other two was over the direction things would take in Eastern Europe after the war.

While Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt were on the same page in many ways, there were also key differences between them.   As noted by The Churchill Project of Hillsdale College, "FDR, ever the optimist, believed (or wanted to believe) that Stalin could be convinced that the West was not committed to destruction of the Soviet regime."  Churchill had a much more skeptical view of Stalin and the Soviet Union and approached the relationship in a firmer fashion.  Roosevelt had hoped to continue cooperation with the USSR.  That changed under Truman, who took over the US Presidency after FDR's death.  Truman was strongly anti-communist in his stance.

Another difference between Roosevelt and Churchill pertained to colonialism and imperialism.  Again as noted by The Churchill Project:  "Over colonialism. Roosevelt firmly believed European colonialism had been a major cause of World War I, and that it had continued to be a source of international disputes and tensions before World War II. Churchill had sworn defend the realm, which, when he took office, included the British Empire."  As it happened, after World War II, colonialism's days were numbered and independence movements broke out around the world where imperial powers had dominated.

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • AWNSER ASAP
    7·1 answer
  • Which of the following reasons best describes why the number of Jim Crow laws increased in the South in the last decade of the 1
    15·2 answers
  • Julius caesar is an important figure in roaman history because he
    8·2 answers
  • What caused the united states to break its neutrality and enter world war 1
    12·1 answer
  • Why did Great Britain start taxing the American colonies after the French and Indian war
    10·1 answer
  • Critics of the World Bank point out that it has not freed the world from poverty; however, advocates claim that World Bank proje
    12·2 answers
  • How did government support women during the war?
    5·1 answer
  • How did rome grow from a single city to the center of a huge empire?
    8·1 answer
  • In the Early 50s, the early Civil Rights Movement was picking up steam with this landmark decree from the Supreme Court in Brown
    5·1 answer
  • Which of these inventions is the first microscope?
    12·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!