Did the losing party over perform or under perform electorally in each election

[OSR stands with Israel]

since 1968, without taking account who the opposing candidate was , unless they were an incumbent president.



1968: Over Performed (No way Humphrey should have been that close to winning, with LBJ being that unpopular, and the amount of unrest their was in the country in 1968)

1972: Under Performed(They should have won around 100 electoral votes this year, seeing that nixon wasnt that popular , and the economy wasnt doing that well)

1976: Around the Same(with mixed conditions in the country , and the president approval being mixed this election always was going to be a close one, and the election was likely going to be won by the dems narrowly due to Ford's Pardon)

1980: Under Performed(Carter got less electoral votes then Hoover did in 1932 and while the country was in terrible shape in 1980 it was no where near as bad of a shape as it was in 1932)

1984: Around the Same(Reagan was super popular , the country was clearly in better shape then it was in 1980, the country wasnt that divided back then as now so this election was always going to result in a massive landslide for Reagan)

1988: Under Performed(After being out of office for 8 years, the party out of power should be able to get more then 112 electoral votes)

1992: Under performed(The country was not in that bad of a shape, the cold war ended under gop rule, and the economy was improving by 1992. While Bush wouldnt have won he should have won at least 210 electoral votes , instead of doing worse then McCain 2008 electorally)

1996: Over Performed( Clinton was popular, and the country was clearly in great shape , there was no reason the GOP should have won more then 140 electoral votes this year)

2000: Under Performed(With the economy being in such good shape, and there being no foreign policy crises , Democrats should have won this election)

2004: Around the Same(With the country being in mixed shape, and being very polarized due to the Iraq War in 2004 this election was always going to be close but since the GOP was in office for  one term this election was likely going to be GOP wins in a close race)

2008:Over Performed (With Bush approval in the 20s, the US being involved in an unpopular war, and the economy crashing two months before the election there was no reason the GOP should have won more then 140 electoral votes)

2012: Under Performed(With the country still being in pretty bad shape economically , this election likely should have been as close as 2000 ,  instead Obama won pretty handily )

2016: Around the Same(With the country conditions still being in mixed shape after 8 years this election was likely going to be won by the GOP and they did)

[OSR stands with Israel]

'68: Over
'72: Under
'76: Under
'80: Under
'84: About the Same
'88: Under
'92: Under
'96: Under [albeit Perot was the true over-performer here]
2000: Over
'04: Over
'08: Over
'12: Under
'16: Under

Why


With how good the shape of the country was in 2000, Democrats should have easily won that election, and in 2016 the conditions favored the Republicans.