What do you consider to be a landslide?

[muon2]

At least 400 EVs and at least an 9-point or 10-point margin between the two candidates, such as Bush vs Dukakis in '88 or Reagan vs Carter in '80.  ('84 was a given).

1988 a landslide ? LOL

Well given my standards of at least 400 electoral votes then yes it was a landslide.

Many of the thresholds proposed here seem to make an awful lot of landslide elections. Maybe posters think that either an election is close or a landslide with very little room in between. I think that both very close elections and landslides are at the edges of the spectrum and that comfortably large wins should be the norm when elections are graded.

I think the best idea is to determine what elections are landslides, then set a threshold so that only those landslide elections pass the cut. For instance, I wouldn't call the 1988 election a landslide nor would most observers who watched it. It was a solid win, but that doesn't make it a landslide.

[FloridaRepublican]

At least 400 EVs and at least an 9-point or 10-point margin between the two candidates, such as Bush vs Dukakis in '88 or Reagan vs Carter in '80.  ('84 was a given).

1988 a landslide ? LOL

Well given my standards of at least 400 electoral votes then yes it was a landslide.

Many of the thresholds proposed here seem to make an awful lot of landslide elections. Maybe posters think that either an election is close or a landslide with very little room in between. I think that both very close elections and landslides are at the edges of the spectrum and that comfortably large wins should be the norm when elections are graded.

I think the best idea is to determine what elections are landslides, then set a threshold so that only those landslide elections pass the cut. For instance, I wouldn't call the 1988 election a landslide nor would most observers who watched it. It was a solid win, but that doesn't make it a landslide.

Alright I'll modify it.  At least 450 evs and a 15-point margin.  How's that?

[ChrisJG777]

538 : Fraudulent

Obviosly, since the only way for GOP to win DC and Vermont, and for dems to win Oklahoma and Utah is to trick.

And to think Vermont used to be quite the Republican stronghold.  What did go wrong? 

[Person Man]

Basically, if you get more than two-thirds (360 votes) of the electoral vote, you have a mandate and all of your major campaign promises that require congress are morally entitled to a up or down vote in Congress. If you get more than eighty percent (428 votes) of the electoral vote, you are the landslide victor and you are under no obligation to participate in bipartisanship. If you get more than 500 electoral votes AND have control of both houses, you have won in a gigantic landslide and are morally obligated pass all of your campaign promises within the next year.   However, if you get less than 55% of the electoral vote (294 votes), you basically won in a barnburner and are morally obligated not to veto any legislation that has survived a Senatorial Fillibuster. Otherwise, in a fair and square election, everyone can morally plead which part of the constitution they can to block or implement the president's agenda.