Isn’t it weird how common landslides used to be?

[TheReckoning]

Between 1920-1996, there were only 4 elections that weren’t landslides: 1948, 1960, 1968, and 1976.

Since then, however, not a single election has been a landslide.

Does this blow your mind?

[TML]

From 1876 to 1916, there were only two landslides (1904 and 1912), and that was what historians call the “Gilded Age.” It appears that we may now be in another Gilded Age-type era.

[TransfemmeGoreVidal]

From 1876 to 1916, there were only two landslides (1904 and 1912), and that was what historians call the “Gilded Age.” It appears that we may now be in another Gilded Age-type era.

Matt Karp wrote a good piece in Jacobin arguing just this.

[Alben Barkley]

It's far more weird, historically speaking, that there haven't been any lately (2008 came closest). States didn't used to be this polarized and their results used to be far more correlated with one another, despite regions, demographics, etc. In a landslide election, most states were easy wins for the winning candidate and in a close election, most states were close across the board. The exceptions were the Gilded Age as mentioned (when it was basically Democratic South vs. Republican North over and over again) and the actual Civil War era.

[Vice President Christian Man]

I think it's because both parties are historically unpopular outside of its main bases. If both of them moderated and became more open minded, they'd each have a better chance of capturing moderates from the opposite party, particularly if a good/popular candidate runs or if the country is in disarray.

[Calthrina950]

From 1876 to 1916, there were only two landslides (1904 and 1912), and that was what historians call the “Gilded Age.” It appears that we may now be in another Gilded Age-type era.

Matt Karp wrote a good piece in Jacobin arguing just this.

This "Second Gilded Age" could last for much longer than the first did, however.