It seems that in a race for an open White House, where there is no incumbent running, those elections seem to gravitate towards a tie, unless it is a 2008 type environment when the fundamentals of the race so overwhelmingly favor one side, or a 1988 type environment, when one side nominates a really awful candidate like Michael Dukakis. Look at 1960, Kennedy vs. Nixon and the fundementals of the race. A popular president, a country in good shape. On paper, Nixon should have had the advantage. Or 1968, with Nixon vs. Humphrey. With Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam. On paper, it should have been a Nixon landslide. Humphrey almost won. In 2016, Obama had pretty good approval numbers and Hillry Clinton lost to Trump. Even in 2008, Obama and McCain came out of the conventions running neck and neck in the polls. It was only when the financial collapse happened that Obama moved ahead. Also, voters are usually reluctant to give one party the presidency for more than 8 years. Bush 41 in 1988 is the exception, but again, Michael Dukakis is just a really awful candidate.
Dukakis wasnt great but calling him awful is stupid. He was beating Bush in the polls and ended up losing by a much more dignified margin than Mondale.
