Liberty's election rankings
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 07:31:04 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Liberty's election rankings
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Author Topic: Liberty's election rankings  (Read 14443 times)
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 28, 2004, 03:41:22 PM »

I like rankings, they're fun and subjective.
I've seen lots of things ranked, the presidents have been ranked on several occasion, an organization called Morgan Quitno ranks the 50 states, ESPN ranked all 98 world series last year. Now Liberty is pleased to present his ranking of all 54 presidential elections!

Elections that were close, exciting, had memorable candidates, memorable moments, memorable slogans, and interesting nominations are ranked high

Elections that were blowouts, had boring candidates, had nothing unique or unusual about them, and had hints of scandal and corruption are ranked low

I will reveal my rankings three at a time so without further ado I present my rankings...

                                     WAIT!
         we still have the disclaimer to go over!

Disclaimer: Liberty knows absolutely nothing about this topic and the opinions expressed by him in this thread are not to be trusted, in short these rankings are not to be taken seriously.          Glad that's out of the way

So now without further ado I present my rankings...

In 54th Place: 1804
The first election to feature separate electoral votes for Pres and VP turned out to be perhaps the most uninteresting contest ever. Jefferson blew away Pinckney 162 to 14 in a race which almost no people could actually vote in as it was before popular vote became common

In 53rd Place: 1820
What almost became the third unanimous election was stopped only by an elector from New Hampshire. The one vote for John Quincy Adams is memorable but otherwise the election was completly a bore and little more than an annoying formality that had to happen.

In 52nd Place: 1868
It was only a landslide, not a complete and total blowout, so why is it ranked this low? Because I can't think of ONE SINGLE THING that distinguishes this election from the 53 others. 1820 may have been really boring but at least there was the John Quincy Adams vote at the end. 1868 had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

More coming soon!
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2004, 05:08:52 PM »

And now for the next three...

In 51st Place: 1816
After the memorable tie of 1800 the first quarter of the 19th century was marked by a stretch of the most boring elections ever where every time the Virginian blew away the Federalist. This one was no exception but it was the last in which the Federalists ran a candidate, ensuring that America would neve be put through such a stretch of boring elections again

In 50th Place: 1908
This is almost a carbon copy of 52nd place 1868. Absolutely nothing at all interesting seemed to have happened in the election and it was a landslide if not a complete blowout. What puts it two places ahead of 1868 is William Jennings Bryan, although he was getting older, he was still that great speaker and candidate

In 49th Place: 1936
When the citizens of Landon's hometown in Kansas were informed he was the Republicans candidate some of them said "who's he?". We all know how the election turned out: "As Maine goes so goes Vermont". Although the election involved the large personality of FDR, it stays at 49 for being such a massive, uncompetitive blowout.

One more group coming later tonight!
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2004, 05:11:19 PM »

After FDR's 1936 Victory, he joked, "I should have spent more time campagning in Maine and Vermont.
Logged
Akno21
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,066
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 28, 2004, 09:00:24 PM »

These rankings could be good, as long as politcal bias is kept out.
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 28, 2004, 09:34:40 PM »

Thank you Akno, and now on with the rankings

In 48th Place: 1812
America's first wartime election turned out to be an indicator for wartime elections to come: The incumbent usually wins in a landslide. The Federalist Party didn't even nominate a candidate but merely endorsed DeWitt Clinton. The biggest irony was that Clinton did better than any of the other candidates nominated by the Federalists in that time period. Poor Federalists

In 47th Place: 1956
Most rematches (such as 1800, 1828, 1892) end up with the previous loser winning. The 1956 election was a rare case of the opposite. Eisenhower easily rolled over Stevenson in a race in which basically the only thing of note was that it was the only time since 1900 that Missouri voted for the loser.

In 46th Place: 1972
Between the Eagleton mess and the electoral vote for Hospers/Nathan this was a pretty good election considering it was a blowout, it might be more than a couple spaces higher on the list if it wasn't for Watergate. It has always baffled me why the Republicans did that considering they were on the way to a 49 state blowout.

That's all for today, more coming tomorrow

In recap:
54: 1804
53: 1820
52: 1868
51: 1816
50: 1908
49: 1936
48: 1812
47: 1956
46: 1972
45-1: ?

Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2004, 10:59:14 AM »

How good are my rankings so far? We now continue...

In 45th Place: 1944
Would there ever be another election without FDR? Perhaps so, as he was getting older and his luster was wearing off; it was the closest election of the four (which means not close at all). The yawn of an election can be summed up with the old phrase "don't swap horses in the middle of the stream"

In 44th Place: 1900
A preview of 1956? Possibly, since it was another rematch where the previous winner won (if not by such an overwhelming margin as in 1956). Bryan wasn't as young and attractive as in 1896 but on the plus side the Republican ticket did feature a new powerful personality, Teddy Roosevelt. "A full dinner pail" easily got Mckinley re-elected in a ho-hum contest

In 43rd Place: 1864
Lincoln was so worried about re-election that he admitted the state of Nevada just to get 3 extra electoral votes (the irony being one elector died so he only got two). The match (overshadowed by the war) against former union general McClellan suddenly became a landslide with the news that the end of the war was at hand.

Any comments or criticism of the rankings so far are welcome!
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2004, 01:22:49 PM »

I would have moved 1972 up a little bit, and would have included 1792 so far in this list.
Logged
Akno21
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,066
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2004, 04:15:33 PM »

I think you should always say who the loser was. You usually do, but not for all of them.

I would put 1792 pretty low as well, unlike the first election, it didn't have the uniqueness of being the first, but like it, there was a landslide.


Overall, very good, and the pace you are giving them out at is good as well.
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2004, 05:32:01 PM »

Before you ask why 1792 isn't  mentioned in the following group is because the contest for vice-president between Adams and Clinton was competitive, but I promise it will be in the next three.

In 42nd Place: 1808
A minor schism in the party (Clinton and Monroe becoming candidates as well as Madison) gave the federalists (with Pinckney as their candidate) hope. But just as in the previous election (and the next two), the feds did poorly. What could have been an interesting battle between the 3 Dem-Rep candidates evaporated when Clinton got only 6 votes with none for Monroe.

In 41st Place: 1996
Very dull in comparison to other recent elections. Dole really was getting old by the time of this election and may not have been up to the job (but what do I know, Ronald Reagan did great). Yes, Perot was there again, but he didn't do nearly as well as in 1992 where he got 1 out of every 5 votes. Perhaps it doesn't deserve to be this low but I persaonally found it unimpressive.

In 40th Place: 1904
Had Roosevelt himself campaigned this might have been a somewhat cool election because of his electrifying personality. But because he didn't it will be remembered merely as the no-contest re-election where he rolled over the compromise Alton Parker. It was the first of a slew of Republican landslides that followed a stretch of Republican squeakers

One more tonight, with 1792 I promise
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2004, 08:40:10 PM »

Now we're in the 30's!

In 39th Place: 1792
Unique for being one of two unanimous elections (along with 1789). It also featured the first political race for an executive office: Adams versus Clinton for the office of VP (Adams won 77-50). It didn't have the newness of 1789, but it was still exciting any time the country got a chance to elect 'Father of our Country' Washington president.

In 38th Place: 1852
Some of the most exciting party conventions of the era took place during this election. On the Democratic side Pierce won the nomination on the *49th* ballot! On the Whig side it took 35 ballots to choose Scott, a candidate so dislikable that many Whigs voted for Pierce. The General election was a bunch of mudslinging with little substance: both candidates avoided the slavery issue.

In 37th Place: 1828
Jackson was determined to get revenge on Adams and Clay after 1824 and he got his wish in this election, humiliating Adams by receiving 56% of the vote. It was the first election in which all states had popular vote (save SC), but it gets ranked this low because it was one of the dirtiest elections ever fought with charges ranging from corruption to adultery.

In recap:
54: 1804
53: 1820
52: 1868
51: 1816
50: 1908
49: 1936
48: 1812
47: 1956
46: 1972
45: 1944
44: 1900
43: 1864
42: 1808
41: 1996
40: 1904
39: 1792
38: 1852
37: 1828
36-1: ?

One third down, two thirds to go, and now we're out of the really bad and boring ones, it's great elections from here on out!
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2004, 09:10:08 PM »

Didn't the election of 1828 spark a new era in America? I would move that up a bit more because it founded the view of government from then until the civil war.
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 30, 2004, 01:32:39 PM »

The attacks on Jackson's wife during that election were so cruel and vicious that some say it lead to her death a month after the election ended, 1828 stays at 37.

In 36th Place: 1920
The first election women could vote in was marked by charges that Harding was part black and by legend of the 'smoke-filled room' and the invention by Harding of the word 'Normalcy'. Perhaps the most noteworthy aspect of the election was the VP of Democratic candidate Cox. He was a young distant cousin of a former president, his name Franklin D Roosevelt. Harding won 60 percent of the vote though in a fairly boring contest of nonentities.

In 35th Place: 1980
A good election that had the misfortune of following an ultra close general election in '76 and proceeding an ultra close primary in '84. Although remembered as a landslide Reagan only got 50.7 percent of the vote. On the positive side it finally gave us the man who was able to break the infamous 'zero election' curse. Also there was Anderson, the lone major third party candidate between Wallace and Perot

In 34th Place: 1988
One of the more nasty elections in recent times had a Democratic field so weak it was called 'the seven dwarfs'. It was a sad thing that even with the collosal speaking blunders of Dan Quayle that Dukakis could only manage 111 votes (should have been 112, but some silly WV elector inverted the ticket to get attention). Perhaps it was the infamous picture of Dukakis in a tank or perhaps it was just old Reagan's coattails.

That's all for now
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 30, 2004, 01:42:26 PM »

I would have put 84 before 80 and 88 on this list.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 30, 2004, 01:45:16 PM »

I would have included 1924 by now. It took over 100 ballots to choose Ambasador John Davis of West Virginia, and he was crushed. His running mate was William J. Bryan's brother, Charles Bryan.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 30, 2004, 04:15:45 PM »

1988 should be in the top ten!
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,806


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: June 30, 2004, 04:26:14 PM »

I would have put 84 before 80 and 88 on this list.

Yeah in both 80 and 88 the eventual losers had a (sometime huge) lead in the polls during those years. Mondale's only lead was in 1983.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,788


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2004, 04:29:47 PM »

I agree. In terms of interest, the 1988 primaries were fascinating, and there was a huge swing in poll support in the months before the election. The use of media by Atwater set new standards.

By comparison, the 1984 election held little interest since the primaries provided far less action and the general election contest was predictable.
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2004, 09:48:37 PM »

It's quite obvious I made a mistake with 1988, ah well just read the disclaimer. I'm only doing one more group tonight instead of two out of laziness, sorry!

In 33rd Place: 1984
After a close primary between Mondale and Hart some genuine excitement was generated by the addition of Geraldine Ferraro to the ballot. By election day it was perfectly clear Reagan would continue as 40th president. Though by the end of the night some were rooting for a sweep Minnesota had to mess it up by just barely going for the favorite son. Complete Blowout

In 32nd Place: 1872
This election produced the most complicated electoral vote tallies ever because of Greeley's unexpected death. It didn't make any difference since he had been steamrolled by Grant but it did lead to thoughts about what would be done if this were to happen again, this time with the winner dying. Kudos to the 3 brave GA electors who stood firm and voted for Greeley, even if their votes were disqualifed in the blowout election.

In 31st Place: 1924
One of the lowest popular vote percentage for a Democrat ever and one of the lowest voter turnouts in history, why is it not lower than 31? For one thing because I love the slogan 'Keep Cool With Coolidge' Cheesy , and for another thing it had one of the longest conventions ever. It took 103 ballots to settle on John Davis (One even quipped the candidate might be born during the convention). Unexciting general election

Ok ok, I admit my rankings pretty much stink, but hey, I DID give that disclaimer at the beggining

In recap:
54: 1804
53: 1820
52: 1868
51: 1816
50: 1908
49: 1936
48: 1812
47: 1956
46: 1972
45: 1944
44: 1900
43: 1864
42: 1808
41: 1996
40: 1904
39: 1792
38: 1852
37: 1828
36: 1920
35: 1980
34: 1988
33: 1984
32: 1872
31: 1928
30-1: ?
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2004, 10:09:00 PM »

Wow! Davis got under 29% in 1924, and almost got that much electorally (25.6%). He got less than 10% in California. It must have been very boring covering the elections of the 1920's.
Logged
platypeanArchcow
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 514


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -7.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: June 30, 2004, 11:15:30 PM »

Wow! Davis got under 29% in 1924, and almost got that much electorally (25.6%). He got less than 10% in California. It must have been very boring covering the elections of the 1920's.

Well, La Follette did add some spice.  And won a state, which can't be said for many other third-party candidates who weren't Southerners.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: July 01, 2004, 01:31:16 AM »

Why are the two biggest landslides in the history of our country '72 and '84 so low?
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: July 01, 2004, 04:20:10 PM »

Why are the two biggest landslides in the history of our country '72 and '84 so low?

It could be argued that 1936 was a bigger landslide than 1984 or 1972.

Actually, Mondale didn't do all that badly PV-wise.  he got around 41%.
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2004, 04:38:39 PM »

Moving along, I decided I'm only doing two groups a day from now on.

In 30th Place: 1928
Remembered chiefly for the irony of the Republican's slogan, the 1928 election also had two major breakthroughs. The first was the nomination of Charles Curtis, who was part Native-American, for Republican VP. The second was the nomination of a catholic, Smith, as the Democrat's candidate. The election was such a landslide that Hoover became the first Republican to break deeply into the South since Reconstruction.

In 29th Place: 1932
Roosevelt made history be becoming the first major candidate to accept his nomination in person during this election. Also making history were Hoover and Curtis, who were the first P/VP team to win and then lose re-election. Roosevelt offered a bright outlook to the future in a time of despair. Although technically not part of the election, it should be noted that Roosevelt narrowly escaped an assasins bullet in Miami the following January

In 28th Place: 1856
Notable for being the first election with the Republicans but not too much else. An interesting three-way race that had Buchanan in the White House without a popular majority while our nation raced toward succession. The Republicans under Fremont got 114 electoral votes, an amazing amount for the party's first bid for national power. Not such an election then, but it was a preview of what was to come of the nascent party.

If someone wants to offer alternate rankings I'd be very interested to see them!
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: July 01, 2004, 05:05:14 PM »

1856 should be further down the list because it featured Mllard Filmore's American No-Nothing Party, one of the most hateful and radical parties by today's standards. He won his home state of Maryland.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: July 01, 2004, 05:59:38 PM »

He won his home state of Maryland.

Fillmore was from New York, not Maryland. He won Maryland  due to it's strong anti-Catholicsm block.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4  
« previous next »
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 0.052 seconds with 11 queries.