What constitutes a landslide victory?

[M]

Read an article by McGovern recently, said something like Dean can't win the general election, but should wi the nomination anyway because he sticks to his principles. McGovern is clearly still in the landslide business.

Sarge Shriver has had greater success, getting his son-in-law elected Governor of California. But then, Arnold is a Republican, so no surprises.

[jravnsbo]

Sarge didn't have much to do with arnold's win, but good show of unity when he did win.

55% would be good for a landslide.  It was for Jeb in 2002 in the governor's race.

[© Tweed the Younger]

I think I remember hearing that a landslide was greater than 55% of the vote and more than 45 states in a Predsidential Election.  Considering no candidate has broken 50% since 1988 55% would be very impressive.

[zorkpolitics]

Since the Constitution defines the Presidency as elected via the Electoral College, a landslide should be defined based on the EC margin.   I would define a landslide as >90% (>484) of the Electoral votes.  This definition recognizes 4 landslides in the last 50 years:
1964 LBJ           486    (61 % PV)
1972 Nixon       520   (60% PV)
1980 Reagan     489    (51% PV)
1984 Reagan     525   (58% PV)
The only outlier in PV is 1980, but then a Anderson took 9% of the vote and Carter polled only 41%.
If one dropped the landslide definition to >75% (>403) EV, then an additional 3 landslides occurred:
1988 Bush             426 (53% PV)
1956 Eisenhower  457 (57% PV)
1952 Eisenhower  442 (55% PV)

Overall, a landslide should be an outstanding accomplishment, so I’ll stick with the 90% cutoff.

[© Tweed the Younger]

51% is not a landslide.  51% means you do not have to reach that far outside of you end of the political spectrum.  A vast majority of senate and governor races have a candidate reach 51%.

[Nym90]

I agree, I think that the definition of landslide should be based on both the popular and electoral vote. A minimum of 55% of the popular vote should be a basic requirement, along with 75% of the Electoral. Thus I would say that Eisenhower's victories should both count, but not Reagan in 1980.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

I agree, I think that the definition of landslide should be based on both the popular and electoral vote. A minimum of 55% of the popular vote should be a basic requirement, along with 75% of the Electoral. Thus I would say that Eisenhower's victories should both count, but not Reagan in 1980.

Why not Reagan in 1980? Read Zorkpolitc's assessment of what constitutes a landslide. I would constitute a Landslide victory in the popular vote as 60% and in the electoral college, 75% or higher. I do have a plan, in another post, how we can eliminate the need for the electoral college and have a popular vote that is indisputable.

[© Tweed the Younger]

Reagan only got 51% of the vote in 1980, so I wouldn't consider that a landslide.  In 1876 Samuel tilden got 51% of the vote and lost the election, which gives my side an argument.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

Reagan only got 51% of the vote in 1980, so I wouldn't consider that a landslide.  In 1876 Samuel tilden got 51% of the vote and lost the election, which gives my side an argument.

POPULAR VOTE, yes, but that doesn't elect the President. He won by a Landslide in the Electoral College.

[© Tweed the Younger]

Reagan only got 51% of the vote in 1980, so I wouldn't consider that a landslide.  In 1876 Samuel tilden got 51% of the vote and lost the election, which gives my side an argument.

POPULAR VOTE, yes, but that doesn't elect the President. He won by a Landslide in the Electoral College.

But a landlslide should have to do with how the people vote, not how the unpredictable electoral college folds out.  In 1912 Woodrow Wilson won 42% of the vote and 82% of the electoral college.

[Gustaf]

Reagan only got 51% of the vote in 1980, so I wouldn't consider that a landslide.  In 1876 Samuel tilden got 51% of the vote and lost the election, which gives my side an argument.

POPULAR VOTE, yes, but that doesn't elect the President. He won by a Landslide in the Electoral College.

But a landlslide should have to do with how the people vote, not how the unpredictable electoral college folds out.  In 1912 Woodrow Wilson won 42% of the vote and 82% of the electoral college.

Yeah, I agree. Talking about a landslide in the EC is a little pointless. If you win you win, but you don't show a lot by widening the margin in the EC, but by doing it in the popular vote.

[Nym90]

Reagan in 1980 I would not consider a landslide since he only got 51% of the popular vote. Good point too, MiamiU, that Wilson in 1912 was landslide in the Electoral vote but far short of even a majority in the popular. That definitely wasn't a landslide victory either.
You yourself said that a landslide should be a minimum 60% of the popular vote, Christopher. I don't feel the threshold should be that high since that would even elminate Reagan in 1984.
Obviously what constitutes a landslide is purely objective on the part of each individual. I think we can all agree though that it should not be so broad as to include lots of elections. It should be reserved for only those in which there is a clear sweeping mandate across the entire population for one candidate.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

Reagan in 1980 I would not consider a landslide since he only got 51% of the popular vote. Good point too, MiamiU, that Wilson in 1912 was landslide in the Electoral vote but far short of even a majority in the popular. That definitely wasn't a landslide victory either.
You yourself said that a landslide should be a minimum 60% of the popular vote, Christopher. I don't feel the threshold should be that high since that would even elminate Reagan in 1984.
Obviously what constitutes a landslide is purely objective on the part of each individual. I think we can all agree though that it should not be so broad as to include lots of elections. It should be reserved for only those in which there is a clear sweeping mandate across the entire population for one candidate.

But, it was a landslide for Reagan in the Electoral College. They elect the President. We were reminded of that by the GORE defeat in the Electoral College.

[© Tweed the Younger]

Reagan in 1980 I would not consider a landslide since he only got 51% of the popular vote. Good point too, MiamiU, that Wilson in 1912 was landslide in the Electoral vote but far short of even a majority in the popular. That definitely wasn't a landslide victory either.
You yourself said that a landslide should be a minimum 60% of the popular vote, Christopher. I don't feel the threshold should be that high since that would even elminate Reagan in 1984.
Obviously what constitutes a landslide is purely objective on the part of each individual. I think we can all agree though that it should not be so broad as to include lots of elections. It should be reserved for only those in which there is a clear sweeping mandate across the entire population for one candidate.

But, it was a landslide for Reagan in the Electoral College. They elect the President. We were reminded of that by the GORE defeat in the Electoral College.

You don't campaign to the electors in the electoral college, you campaign to the people, so the people should be the ones that decide if an election is a landslide.

[Gustaf]

Reagan in 1980 I would not consider a landslide since he only got 51% of the popular vote. Good point too, MiamiU, that Wilson in 1912 was landslide in the Electoral vote but far short of even a majority in the popular. That definitely wasn't a landslide victory either.
You yourself said that a landslide should be a minimum 60% of the popular vote, Christopher. I don't feel the threshold should be that high since that would even elminate Reagan in 1984.
Obviously what constitutes a landslide is purely objective on the part of each individual. I think we can all agree though that it should not be so broad as to include lots of elections. It should be reserved for only those in which there is a clear sweeping mandate across the entire population for one candidate.

But, it was a landslide for Reagan in the Electoral College. They elect the President. We were reminded of that by the GORE defeat in the Electoral College.

You don't campaign to the electors in the electoral college, you campaign to the people, so the people should be the ones that decide if an election is a landslide.

Considering the fact that the people don't get to decide who becomes president it's really only fair that they get to decide something, so I agree!

[© Tweed the Younger]

Reagan in 1980 I would not consider a landslide since he only got 51% of the popular vote. Good point too, MiamiU, that Wilson in 1912 was landslide in the Electoral vote but far short of even a majority in the popular. That definitely wasn't a landslide victory either.
You yourself said that a landslide should be a minimum 60% of the popular vote, Christopher. I don't feel the threshold should be that high since that would even elminate Reagan in 1984.
Obviously what constitutes a landslide is purely objective on the part of each individual. I think we can all agree though that it should not be so broad as to include lots of elections. It should be reserved for only those in which there is a clear sweeping mandate across the entire population for one candidate.

But, it was a landslide for Reagan in the Electoral College. They elect the President. We were reminded of that by the GORE defeat in the Electoral College.

You don't campaign to the electors in the electoral college, you campaign to the people, so the people should be the ones that decide if an election is a landslide.

Considering the fact that the people don't get to decide who becomes president it's really only fair that they get to decide something, so I agree!

Haha...

[jravnsbo]

A landslide is in perception.

Reagan's win in 80 was close in popular vote but a landslide in Ev.  When those states rolled up on the map all for Reagan ,plus such an early conession plus freeing of Hostages on reagan's swearing in all leant to the perception that Reagan won and was right for America.

Plus after such disasters in Carter's presidency a landslide was inevitable.

[zorkpolitics]

A landslide is in perception.

Good point, I stick with my earlier post, a Landslide is a 90% win in the Electoral College.  Once all those states are displayed on election night, all the same color, no one will doubt its a Landslide win for the winning candidate.
The popular vote is just an interesting, non-Constitutionally relevant, statistic

[© Tweed the Younger]

A landslide is in perception.

Reagan's win in 80 was close in popular vote but a landslide in Ev.  When those states rolled up on the map all for Reagan ,plus such an early conession plus freeing of Hostages on reagan's swearing in all leant to the perception that Reagan won and was right for America.

Plus after such disasters in Carter's presidency a landslide was inevitable.

good point.

[jravnsbo]

yeah and another point is that both major parties should get around 30% easy, even in landslides it is the fight for the rest that matters.  

Remember seeing signs that said  X million ( can't remember number) of people can't be wrong" when Goldwater lost to LBJ and both sides say that was a landslide.