Candidate who could have won despite losing the PV and by how much in every election since 1948

[OSR stands with Israel]

1948: Dewey could have won the Elecotral College despite losing the popular vote by 3.64 points
1952: Eisenhower could have the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 0.42 points
1956: Stevenson could have won the Elecotral College despite losing the popular vote by 0.86 points
1960: JFK could have won the Elecotral College despite losing the popular vote by 0.63 points
1964: LBJ could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 2.01 points
1968: Nixon could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 1.5 points
1972: McGovern could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by .17 points 
1976: Ford could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 0.38 points
1980: Carter could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 1.81 points
1984: Reagan could have won won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 0.78 points
1988: Bush could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 0.16 points
1992: Bush could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 0.91 points
1996: Clinton could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 0.67 points
2000: Bush could have won the electoral college despite losing the popular vote by 0.54 points(exactly what happened)
2004: Kerry could have won the electoral college despite losing the popular vote by 0.35 point
2008: Obama could have won the electoral college despite losing the popular vote by 2.25 points
2012: Obama could have won the electoral college despite losing the popular vote by 1.51 points
2016: Trump could have won the electoral college despite losing the popular vote by 2.86 points



So from 1948-now Dewey had by far the biggest electoral college advantage

[OSR stands with Israel]

2020: Trump could have won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote by 3.82 points

[President Johnson]

Interesting list.

As for 1996, a few years ago I run through the numbers and found out that if you add all of Perot's votes on Bob Dole, Dole would have narrowly won the Electoral College while Clinton would have won the popular vote by around 100,000.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Interesting list.

As for 1996, a few years ago I run through the numbers and found out that if you add all of Perot's votes on Bob Dole, Dole would have narrowly won the Electoral College while Clinton would have won the popular vote by around 100,000.

I do find it insane that Obama had the largest electoral advantage from 1952-2012 though given how fast things have shifted since then . I think a large part of that was Obama was extremely strong for a democrat with Northern WWC voters even though he did horrible with Southern and Western WWC and also Obama was extremely adept at winning over the smaller states .

Like it’s very hard to see in either of his runs Obama losing states like IA NH NV(From Lehman on) NM and that provide a pretty strong firewall for Obama as that means he’d just have needed one of FL/VA/OH/CO to win the presidency. Obama seems like he probably was the only democrat this century to understand the importance of winning over small states and my guess is that’s probably cause that’s how he won the primary to begin with

[President Johnson]

Interesting list.

As for 1996, a few years ago I run through the numbers and found out that if you add all of Perot's votes on Bob Dole, Dole would have narrowly won the Electoral College while Clinton would have won the popular vote by around 100,000.

I do find it insane that Obama had the largest electoral advantage from 1952-2012 though given how fast things have shifted since then . I think a large part of that was Obama was extremely strong for a democrat with Northern WWC voters even though he did horrible with Southern and Western WWC and also Obama was extremely adept at winning over the smaller states .

Like it’s very hard to see in either of his runs Obama losing states like IA NH NV(From Lehman on) NM and that provide a pretty strong firewall for Obama as that means he’d just have needed one of FL/VA/OH/CO to win the presidency. Obama seems like he probably was the only democrat this century to understand the importance of winning over small states and my guess is that’s probably cause that’s how he won the primary to begin with

Obama was a once in a generation politician, especially as a campaigner. I could actually see him become some kind of a Democratic Reagan in the coming decades.

[Skill and Chance]

It's clear you are counting an electoral college tie as a Trump win in 2020.  How are you counting the no majority due to Thurmond scenario in 1948?  It seems pretty clear that it shouldn't be counted as an outright Truman win because he would need the Thurmond-endorsing Southern delegations to win in the House and they could easily make a deal with Dewey.

California, the deciding state to give Truman an outright majority in the EC, was closer than Wisconsin in 2020, so I would say Dewey still narrowly had a greater EC advantage than Trump.  His advantage would be 4.04% assuming Truman needs California.   

[OSR stands with Israel]

It's clear you are counting an electoral college tie as a Trump win in 2020.  How are you counting the no majority due to Thurmond scenario in 1948?  It seems pretty clear that it shouldn't be counted as an outright Truman win because he would need the Thurmond-endorsing Southern delegations to win in the House and they could easily make a deal with Dewey.

California, the deciding state to give Truman an outright majority in the EC, was closer than Wisconsin in 2020, so I would say Dewey still narrowly had a greater EC advantage than Trump.  His advantage would be 4.04% assuming Truman needs California.  

Yah I just went with Truman winning if he didnt get a majority of EV but yah are right about Thurmond potentially making a deal with Dewey.