If we consider the earlier lie, the Florida voting results, he’d never have had the job in the first place.
There it is again, the “Gore won Florida” meme.
1) Probably nobody (Occam included) will ever know who won Florida in terms of voter intent as expressed on legal ballots
2) Gore engaged in clear gamesmanship by challenging in only two (make that “a few select” since I don’t remember the number—except I think it wasn’t just two) counties the overall vote total based on known statewide imperfections in machine voting
3) If the SCOTUS had let the Florida Supreme Court decision stand then Bush almost certainly would have won the state (based on a coalition evaluation of ballots)
4) Counting overvotes as well as undervotes (overvotes were explicitly invalid under the law at the time), Gore probably would have won, but
5) the aforementioned review of ballots found literally thousands were cast illegally (by felons and others voting illegally).
So, if Gore’s advantage in the “voter intent” recount of all ballots had given him the edge, would his victory rest on an advantage produced by illegal votes (felons tend to vote Democrat, apparently)?
Nobody knows (not even Occam).
What we know is that Bush won Florida under the method literally used by the state for that election prior to legal challenges: Votes counted by machines with a known error rate (in most Florida counties). It is arguable (and Florda Secretary of State Harris did so on the basis of advice from her Democrat-leaning legal team) that is was the intent of the law to prefer the machine count where nothing more than normal machine error affected the final count. Simply note that the state’s procedure for very close elections was to perform a machine recount.
Sorry for the digression, but this important point of history has way too much misinformation surrounding it.