Was 1952 A Landslide?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 01:50:52 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Was 1952 A Landslide?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Was 1952 A Landslide?  (Read 1042 times)
MIKESOWELL
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 535
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 30, 2016, 02:14:52 AM »

I ask this because I have seen some who have stated that it doesn't meet their criteria for a landslide. Personally, it does for me. In a two man race, I expect the winner to prevail by at least 10 points and win 55 percent of the vote. Dwight Eisenhower won 55.1% of the popular vote, and beat Adlai Stevenson by 10.7 percentage points. The Electoral College vote was overwhelming, 442 to 89. He carried 39 states to Stevenson's nine. If anything, Ike over-performed from what most prognosticators were espousing pre-election. I will argue that it may have been the most "modest" of all elections that classify as true landslides. Ike even had coattails; in the House the GOP gained 22 seats and won a narrow majority. In the Senate the Republicans gained two seats for a narrow majority as well. What say you, guys?
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2016, 04:24:32 AM »

I consider winning by a double-digits a landslide, not a massive one (like 1964, 1972 or 1984), but of sort anyway.
Logged
Podgy the Bear
mollybecky
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,963


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2016, 05:25:45 AM »

Ike did over-perform on Election Day.  The polls did indicate a slight but clear lead over Stevenson (about 4-7 points).  Likely the eventual wariness of 20 years of Democratic rule and general dissatisfaction with the Truman administration crystallized as November 1952 rolled around.  Also, there is evidence that Eisenhower's "I will go to Korea" speech was generally helpful to him politically.
Logged
Clark Kent
ClarkKent
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,480
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2016, 06:55:58 AM »

I consider winning by a margin of at least 10% while winning a majority of the vote to be a landslide. Near-10% victories like 1940 (9.8%) and 1980 (9.7%) are close enough, so I count them anyways.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2016, 07:38:37 AM »

I go by electoral votes to determine if a presidential election was a landslide, and my standard is that the losing candidate get less than 100 EVs.  So by that standard, 1952 was a landslide.
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,349
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2016, 09:17:07 AM »

I'd say yes. Everything over 53% of the PV and 70% of the EV is a landslide in my opinion.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,451
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2016, 01:34:27 PM »

I consider winning by a margin of at least 10% while winning a majority of the vote to be a landslide. Near-10% victories like 1940 (9.8%) and 1980 (9.7%) are close enough, so I count them anyways.

Agreed.

The Electoral Vote doesn't mean that much. Just look at 1912.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2016, 03:10:43 PM »

I consider winning by a margin of at least 10% while winning a majority of the vote to be a landslide. Near-10% victories like 1940 (9.8%) and 1980 (9.7%) are close enough, so I count them anyways.

Agreed.

The Electoral Vote doesn't mean that much. Just look at 1912.

On the other hand, Wilson had a double-digits margin over the next candidate.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,451
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2016, 03:29:39 PM »

I consider winning by a margin of at least 10% while winning a majority of the vote to be a landslide. Near-10% victories like 1940 (9.8%) and 1980 (9.7%) are close enough, so I count them anyways.

Agreed.

The Electoral Vote doesn't mean that much. Just look at 1912.

On the other hand, Wilson had a double-digits margin over the next candidate.

That's true. But 42% isn't that much anyway. Maybe 1852 fits better with that comparison. Popolar vote 50 to 43%, but Pierce won 85% of the electoral vote.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.037 seconds with 11 queries.