Worse Defeat

[OSR stands with Israel]

1980 or 1932

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

1932, duh.

[Türkisblau]

1932 for the sheer amount of the popular vote in favor of FDR and the immense gains by Democrats in both chambers.

[ElectionsGuy]

Hmm...

Reagan - 50.7%
Carter - 41.0%

Roosevelt - 57.4%
Hoover - 39.6%

I'm going to go with 1932.

1932 for the sheer amount of the popular vote in favor of FDR and the immense gains by Democrats in both chambers.

This too. Republicans lost 101 seats (!!) in the House and 12 Senate seats. They (Democrats) literally won all but 6 Senate races up that year. The backlash against Republicans was at the highest level in American history.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

You could make an argument that 1980 was a worse defeat because it came after just ONE term for the Democrats. 1932 happened when Republicans were seeking a FOURTH term.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You could make an argument that 1980 was a worse defeat because it came after just ONE term for the Democrats. 1932 happened when Republicans were seeking a FOURTH term.

Naw, that doesn't matter. The 6 biggest incumbent defeats are
1. 1932
2. 1912
3. 1828
4. 1980
5. 1992
6. 1840

1800, 1888, 1892, and 1976 were all pretty close.

[Oregreen]

You could make an argument that 1980 was a worse defeat because it came after just ONE term for the Democrats. 1932 happened when Republicans were seeking a FOURTH term.

Naw, that doesn't matter. The 6 biggest incumbent defeats are
1. 1932
2. 1912
3. 1828
4. 1980
5. 1992
6. 1840

1800, 1888, 1892, and 1976 were all pretty close.

You could argue that 1992 was also pretty close. Clinton won many states by very small margins. Tennesse was the tipping point state, and Clinton only won it by 4.65%. I still don't know why many people think that Clinton won in a landslide. That may be true by just looking at the Electoral College numbers. But if you give Bush every state that Clinton won by less than 5%, here's what you get.

Bush 275 EV      Clinton 263 EV

Bush's reelection certainly was improbable, but without Perot on the ballot (he split the white vote in many states while Blacks were united behind Clinton) and by focussing more on those states, it certainly would have been possible. That would have been one of the biggest upsets in American political history. By the way: Clinton didn't even win 50% in 1996!

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

You could make an argument that 1980 was a worse defeat because it came after just ONE term for the Democrats. 1932 happened when Republicans were seeking a FOURTH term.

Naw, that doesn't matter. The 6 biggest incumbent defeats are
1. 1932
2. 1912
3. 1828
4. 1980
5. 1992
6. 1840

1800, 1888, 1892, and 1976 were all pretty close.

Well yeah if we're going strictly by the numbers, then 1932 obviously wins. I'm just providing some context...only once since 1896 has a party lost the White House after just one term, and they did so by a wide margin.

[OSR stands with Israel]

You could make an argument that 1980 was a worse defeat because it came after just ONE term for the Democrats. 1932 happened when Republicans were seeking a FOURTH term.

Naw, that doesn't matter. The 6 biggest incumbent defeats are
1. 1932
2. 1912
3. 1828
4. 1980
5. 1992
6. 1840

1800, 1888, 1892, and 1976 were all pretty close.

I think 1840 was bigger defeat then 1992