I would like to comment on HT Lee's letter in which he said that Bill Clinton won 54.7% of the popular vote in 1996.

The American presidential results for 1988 - 2004 by popular vote and electoral vote are as follows:

1988 - Bush (53.4%, 426), Dukakis (45.6%, 111)

1992 - Clinton (42.93%, 370), Bush (37.38%, 168), Perot (18.87%, 0)

1996 - Clinton (49.24%, 379), Dole (40.71%, 159), Perot (8.4%, 0)

2000 - Bush (47.87%, 271), Gore (48.38%, 266), Nader (2.74%, 0)

2004 - Bush (50.9%, 286), Kerry (48.1%, 252)

*In 1998 and 1992 Bush refers to George Herbert Walker Bush while in 2000 and 2004, Bush refers to George Walker Bush)

Lee's incorrect 54.7% figure is obtained from disregarding the votes obtained by candidates other than Clinton and Dole. The results for 1996 are as follows:

Clinton - 47,402,357 (49.24 %)

Dole - 39,198,755 (40.71 %)

Perot - 8,058,402 (8.4 %)

Others - 1,591,120 (1.65%)

Total = 96,277,634

If you disregard Ross Perot and others, you can obtain 54.7% by 47,402,357 / (47,402,357 + 39,198,755).

It is therefore definitely correct to say that George W Bush is the first candidate to obtain more than 50% of the popular vote since the 1988 election. Clinton never achieved a majority of the popular vote, partly because of Ross Perot.

Lee's following statement is therefore in error: 'But his popular vote is the lowest ever for a re-elected president since popular votes were first tallied in the 1820s.' I believe this statement refers to the percentage and not the total number of popular votes (which obviously grows along with the population).

By referring to percentages, Bush's 50.9% is certainly more than Clinton's 49.24%.

Lee, at the website where he obtained the 54.7% figure from, I think forgot to read this line: 'It's true that the percentages are different if you add in third party candidates, but since there is no distribution of preferences in the American system ....'.

Malaysiakini columnist Phar Kim Beng was not in error.