Do people tend to think 1972 = 1984 in terms of margin?

[Nichlemn]

I get the sense that they're both seen as more or less equal "49 state Republican landslides". But this neglects the fact that Nixon actually did a fair bit better than Reagan, winning by 23 points as compared to Reagan's 18. If we look at the Democrats, McGovern did 3 percent worse than Mondale. This is a larger difference than the one between Jimmy Carter's "narrow" win and Obama's "decisive" win. What gives? Is it the similar Electoral College margin? Is it the similar-looking Electoral College map? Is it that margins are evaluated by proportional rather than absolute difference?

[Dancing with Myself]

I get the sense that they're both seen as more or less equal "49 state Republican landslides". But this neglects the fact that Nixon actually did a fair bit better than Reagan, winning by 23 points as compared to Reagan's 18. If we look at the Democrats, McGovern did 3 percent worse than Mondale. This is a larger difference than the one between Jimmy Carter's "narrow" win and Obama's "decisive" win. What gives? Is it the similar Electoral College margin? Is it the similar-looking Electoral College map? Is it that margins are evaluated by proportional rather than absolute difference?

Mondale was a better candidate than McGovern was. He might have said some stupid things, but he had an actual campaign and did well at the debates, unlike McGovern he tried.

[memphis]

I don't think many people think of 1972 or 1984 at all.

[Antonio the Sixth]

People tend to focus on the electoral map and neglect popular vote data. They tend to forget that the same PV margin can produce very different maps and reciprocally.

The fact Mondale didn't have any true stronghold (even MN almost went for Reagan) was Reagan's strength. On the other hand, had Mondale won by 18 points, he would have taken more EVs than LBJ did with 23.

[Napoleon]

People tend to focus on the electoral map and neglect popular vote data. They tend to forget that the same PV margin can produce very different maps and reciprocally.

The fact Mondale didn't have any true stronghold (even MN almost went for Reagan) was Reagan's strength. On the other hand, had Mondale won by 18 points, he would have taken more EVs than LBJ did with 23.

Things don't work like that. At all.

[Antonio the Sixth]

People tend to focus on the electoral map and neglect popular vote data. They tend to forget that the same PV margin can produce very different maps and reciprocally.

The fact Mondale didn't have any true stronghold (even MN almost went for Reagan) was Reagan's strength. On the other hand, had Mondale won by 18 points, he would have taken more EVs than LBJ did with 23.

Things don't work like that. At all.

The truth is that, neither you nor me have any clue about how "things work". Uniform National Swing isn't perfect, but it's the most logical assumption you can make if you're interested in knowing how things could turn out with a different margin.

[Thomas D]

I think most people do. They see 2 elections where the GOP won 49 states and won about 60-40 in the PV. Of course WE know better.

[Napoleon]

If by most logical you mean most simple and not at all logical, then maybe. I would advise against stating the jibberish as if it were some sort of fact, however.

[phk]

I don't think many people think of 1972 or 1984 at all.

[phk]

...and Yes, Napoleon is right.

You'll need a multivariate regression to get closer.

[Antonio the Sixth]

...and Yes, Napoleon is right.

You'll need a multivariate regression to get closer.

You can't use multivariate regression because no election is similar to the previous one. If you find that, for example, California tends to swing more strongly than the nation (ie, when republicans win, it is more republican and conversely), it might just be that California has trended democrat by the time democrats won bigger victories. Presidential elections are too rare and subject to bold swings for complicated statistical analyses to make any sense.

Conclusion : we have no way to know how an EV map would have turned out with a different PV margin. When you have no way to know something, the best assumption is the simplest one. In your own words, Napoleon...

[sg0508]

Mondale was far stronger in the indusrial north.  There's the difference.

[Username MechaRFK]

Mondale was far stronger in the indusrial north.  There's the difference.

Mondale was much more appealing to say the upstate New York or Southie crowd then say McGovern was. I haven't look at any results from both places but I couldn't see either crowd caring for the amnesty, abortion and acid George McGovern(odd enough he was states rights/pro-life when it came to the issue of abortion). Walter Mondale was your establishment liberal that could appeal to blue collar/working class people, though many of the older working class were Reagan democrats. McGovern crowd were the crowd that mostly supported candidates such as Barack Obama, Howard Dean, Bill Bradley, Paul Tsongas, Paul Simon, Gary Hart 84, Ted Kennedy, Jerry Brown 76 and Eugene McCarthy. Mondale crowd would support the establishment candidates such as Hillary Clinton, Wesley Clark, Al Gore 2000, Bill Clinton, Michael Dukakis, Jimmy Carter, Ed Muskie, and Hubert Humphrey. That how I see it at least.

[Simfan34]

I don't think many people think of 1972 or 1984 at all.

Those who spend time thinking of the elections of 1972 or 1984 would know enough not to think so.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Nixon may have won by a greater margin, but his victory had less of an impact on the House and Senate than Reagan's did.