Candidates B and C would have an election with the winner facing candidate A
Answer: hope it helps :)))))))
Explanation:
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached among state delegates during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. Whether and, if so, how slaves would be counted when determining a state's total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes was important, as this population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years. The compromise solution was to count three out of every five slaves as people for this purpose. Its effect was to give the Southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored, but fewer than if slaves and free people had been counted equally
Third parties generally serve only to take votes from one of the main parties. Third parties generally serve only to take votes from one of the main parties. If the third party has a candidate promising similar things to the Rep. candidate, the Democrats are more likely to win simply because their votes are not being siphoned off. Think of it this way: if a school class were to vote on favorite colors and there were only blue and red to choose from, it would probably be mostly equal. But if the same class were to vote for blue, teal, and red, I would be willing to bet that red would win just because its votes weren't being split like the blue votes were. Teal is the third party. It won't ever win on its own, but it can be influential in that it can help the opposite party win.
