What constitutes a landslide victory?

[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.

[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!