was 1976 the last election where

[Antonio the Sixth]

As I've said before, its amazing to compare how many states were actually competative back then before the hard divide into red, blue and purple states. Damn few states in 76 were a rout for either candidate.

A very sad trend.

True. Political polarization in current elections is quite disgusting.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Is that much more polarized?

Yes.

Here's another way to see it. Here are the States that differ from the national PV margin by more than 10 points for either party.


1976 :

Carter : 78
Ford : 39
Competitive : 421


2008 :

McCain : 160
Obama : 157
Competitive : 221

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes, there was greater variance in state-by-state results in 2004 than 1976, but I think that says a lot more about 1976 than it does about 2004. The default in US politics has been polarisation, 1976 is one of the outliers. Just take a look at pretty much every election from 1856 to 1972 - 1976 is a product of a slow regional realignment, where states are "crossing over" and hence will be competitive for a time.

Are you sure ? Here is 1960 :

Nixon : 68
Kennedy : 61
Competitive : 408

[Antonio the Sixth]

Napoleon, your map is not made in the way mine was. It's not the variation from the candidate's score that you must count, but the variation from his margin of victory. My criterion is twice more restrictive than yours.

And here is the map we get :

Gore : 168
Bush : 146
Competitive : 224

Basically as polarized as 2008.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's in the same time period, in a period of realignment. (The South began to realign before the Civil Rights Act).

So 1976 was not an outlier : it was part of a long period during which politics were less polarized. The reason of the lack of polarization during this period was not my point.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Antonio, the popular vote margin was less than one percentage point. It was essentially a tie.

So ? What does it change ?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Antonio, the popular vote margin was less than one percentage point. It was essentially a tie.

So ? What does it change ?

58% in a given state would be R+10 or D+10.

No. Margins, not % votes. 53% in a given State would be R+10 or D+10 (if the opponent gets 43%).

Don't reason in terms of percentage, but in terms of margin.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Your wording is/ was very confusing. To differ from the margin by ten would be to add or subtract ten. You're wanting the margin itself to be within ten, which would be a difference OF.

Ok, let's put it that way.

The election is a democrat 55/35 win. 55-35=20. It's a D+20 win.

A State gave 60 to the democrat and 29 to the republican. It's a D+31 win.

31-20=11. This State qualifies as "not competitive", because the margin differs from the national margin.

Instead, you count only the democrat's percentage. 60-55=5, thus you qualify the State as "competitive". And this method is problematic because it doesn't take into account biases brought by an exceptionally strong/weak third party performance.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Sorry if I didn't express myself correctly. I hope it's clear now.