NEW AP POLL - Bush +1% - Nader @ 6% (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 12, 2024, 03:33:38 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  NEW AP POLL - Bush +1% - Nader @ 6% (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: NEW AP POLL - Bush +1% - Nader @ 6%  (Read 4528 times)
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


« on: March 05, 2004, 02:23:56 AM »

Based on historical data my prediction is George W. will be defeated. Woodrow Wilson was the only elected incumbent president to win by less than 5% (and that was an extraordinary era), all the other elected incumbents have won by landslides. If an incumbent is tied, he is really behind.


Hmmm, are we forgetting about Truman?

Be serious Supersoulty, Truman won by like 4.48% and it too was a unique election with the dixiecrat Thurmond taking a percent or so from him and a few states.

It is a valid point, Clinton, Reagan, Nixon, Johnson, Truman (would have if it wasn't for the dixie crats) , FDR, Coolidge, TR, McKinley, remember the last incumbent to barely win the popular vote (excepting Wilson)  (i think) was good ole Grover Cleveland and he lost in the electoral college.

I think we can all agree that we won't be having a strong enough third party to get an Electoral Vote (unless Roy Moore runs, run Roy run!!!). So i think  zachman is perfectly legitmate to point out this valid trend that incumbents win overwhelming unless there is a strong third party garnering electoral votes.

If you want supersoulty we will change the line too:  4.45% would that make you feel better?

Clinton ?
No winning incumbent won less % of pv then him. ever
Logged
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2004, 03:17:49 PM »


Don't forget, the republicans have won california in six of the last ten presidential contests.  With Kim Jung Il's recent Kerry endorsement and with Mayor Newsom's bitch brigade running roughshod over state law, don't be surprised if it becomes 7 of 11.
6 of 10 but 0 for 3 last 3 elections. Akk double digits losses
Logged
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2004, 03:40:32 PM »


Don't forget, the republicans have won california in six of the last ten presidential contests.  With Kim Jung Il's recent Kerry endorsement and with Mayor Newsom's bitch brigade running roughshod over state law, don't be surprised if it becomes 7 of 11.
6 of 10 but 0 for 3 last 3 elections. Akk double digits losses

CA has been the home state of the GOP nominee in 4 of this 6 wins.

Technicly speaking Nixon home state in 68' and 72' was NY , he moved there in 63'-64 to open a law firm. o/c his true home was California
Logged
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


« Reply #3 on: March 05, 2004, 05:55:13 PM »


Don't forget, the republicans have won california in six of the last ten presidential contests.  With Kim Jung Il's recent Kerry endorsement and with Mayor Newsom's bitch brigade running roughshod over state law, don't be surprised if it becomes 7 of 11.
6 of 10 but 0 for 3 last 3 elections. Akk double digits losses

CA has been the home state of the GOP nominee in 4 of this 6 wins.

Technicly speaking Nixon home state in 68' and 72' was NY , he moved there in 63'-64 to open a law firm. o/c his true home was California

This site says it was CA again in 1972. I know it was NY formally for 1968, but I didn't count that... Wink

well it was formally. 72' too I think
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.043 seconds with 13 queries.