CA and Dems!?

[TommyC1776]

It seems throughout history California has been friendly to Dems alot as far as them winning the state or getting close in the vote.  Actually I think Illinois did the same thing (not alot though).

[Aizen]

Whoa, you're right

[Padfoot]

Out of the 39 presidential elections in which California has been a participant it went for the Republicans in 23 of them, Democrats in 15, and once for an independent back in 1912.  That hardly seems like anything close to a winning record for the Democrats.  On top of that, Democrats didn't manage to win the state in two consecutive elections until FDR came along and won nearly every state for four elections in a row.  Then, after the 1948 election Democrats went on another dry spell and only managed to win the state once out of the next ten elections.  Bill Clinton was the first Democrat to carry the state of California since the landslide election of Lyndon Johnson.

So, IMO a more accurate statement would read as follows:

"It seems throughout history California has been friendly to Republicans a lot as far as them winning the state or getting close in the vote.  So why the hell have they lost it in the last four elections?"

After coming to this conclusion I must ask you this one question:  What was the point of this post?

[Hash]

After coming to this conclusion I must ask you this one question:  What was the point of this post?

Ditto. Since 1948, as said above, California has been quite Republican. It voted Republican in 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988.
 
What's the point of this post, and all other posts about one state and the Dems heh?

[TommyC1776]

After coming to this conclusion I must ask you this one question:  What was the point of this post?

Ditto. Since 1948, as said above, California has been quite Republican. It voted Republican in 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988.
 
What's the point of this post, and all other posts about one state and the Dems heh?

i just wanna ask questions.  idk.  i am sorry.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Most California governors have been Republicans, especially since 1900.

[TommyC1776]

Out of the 39 presidential elections in which California has been a participant it went for the Republicans in 23 of them, Democrats in 15, and once for an independent back in 1912.  That hardly seems like anything close to a winning record for the Democrats.  On top of that, Democrats didn't manage to win the state in two consecutive elections until FDR came along and won nearly every state for four elections in a row.  Then, after the 1948 election Democrats went on another dry spell and only managed to win the state once out of the next ten elections.  Bill Clinton was the first Democrat to carry the state of California since the landslide election of Lyndon Johnson.

So, IMO a more accurate statement would read as follows:

"It seems throughout history California has been friendly to Republicans a lot as far as them winning the state or getting close in the vote.  So why the hell have they lost it in the last four elections?"

After coming to this conclusion I must ask you this one question:  What was the point of this post?

I was jw about this.  Also, maybe the Republicans won California alot but it seemed that in the 1800s like Hancock, Seymour, Tilden did well there.  even Cleveland too.

[SPC]

Out of the 39 presidential elections in which California has been a participant it went for the Republicans in 23 of them, Democrats in 15, and once for an independent back in 1912.  That hardly seems like anything close to a winning record for the Democrats.  On top of that, Democrats didn't manage to win the state in two consecutive elections until FDR came along and won nearly every state for four elections in a row.  Then, after the 1948 election Democrats went on another dry spell and only managed to win the state once out of the next ten elections.  Bill Clinton was the first Democrat to carry the state of California since the landslide election of Lyndon Johnson.

So, IMO a more accurate statement would read as follows:

"It seems throughout history California has been friendly to Republicans a lot as far as them winning the state or getting close in the vote.  So why the hell have they lost it in the last four elections?"

After coming to this conclusion I must ask you this one question:  What was the point of this post?

I was jw about this.  Also, maybe the Republicans won California alot but it seemed that in the 1800s like Hancock, Seymour, Tilden did well there.  even Cleveland too.

Cleveland was a conservative though. He was arguably the most conservative Democratic president in American history.

[TommyC1776]

Out of the 39 presidential elections in which California has been a participant it went for the Republicans in 23 of them, Democrats in 15, and once for an independent back in 1912.  That hardly seems like anything close to a winning record for the Democrats.  On top of that, Democrats didn't manage to win the state in two consecutive elections until FDR came along and won nearly every state for four elections in a row.  Then, after the 1948 election Democrats went on another dry spell and only managed to win the state once out of the next ten elections.  Bill Clinton was the first Democrat to carry the state of California since the landslide election of Lyndon Johnson.

So, IMO a more accurate statement would read as follows:

"It seems throughout history California has been friendly to Republicans a lot as far as them winning the state or getting close in the vote.  So why the hell have they lost it in the last four elections?"

After coming to this conclusion I must ask you this one question:  What was the point of this post?

I was jw about this.  Also, maybe the Republicans won California alot but it seemed that in the 1800s like Hancock, Seymour, Tilden did well there.  even Cleveland too.

Cleveland was a conservative though. He was arguably the most conservative Democratic president in American history.

o. ok.  idk that.