Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Taking on the Zombie Perot-Myth/Smear (With Maddow video) [View all]ericson00
(2,707 posts)8. did you read the post?
But the answer to your question is 4 in 57 elections, which is still less than 10% of the time, or more precisely, 7 percent of the time. And that counts the rigged election of 2000. If you count 2000 as the Gore win it really was, then its 94.7% of the time the winner of the popular and electoral vote is the same.
Sorry, but facts and figures work against Clinton hatred any day.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
37 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
How many elections in the last 125 years have a different popular vote & electoral vote winner?
ericson00
Jul 2015
#5
1800, 1828, 1932, 1980, 2008 those were realigning elections. If Clinton changed the electorate so
craigmatic
Jul 2015
#13
The reason the republicans stopped winning so many electoral votes is because
craigmatic
Jul 2015
#15
Most people don't consider 1968 realigning because policy didn't really change neither did
craigmatic
Jul 2015
#17
SCOTUS justices are the bare minimum of what we expect of a democratic president.
craigmatic
Jul 2015
#33
Also, if you, like me, are offended by the smear against the facts the Clintons,
ericson00
Jul 2015
#19