State winner not the Overall Winner
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:31:58 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)
  State winner not the Overall Winner
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: State winner not the Overall Winner  (Read 4275 times)
rockhound
Rookie
**
Posts: 161


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 20, 2004, 07:51:48 PM »

Everyone always talks about the times (like 2000) when the winner of the popular vote did not win the election.

But since the Electoral college is a by-product of the Conecticut compromise, we should be just as interested in the times that the winner of the majority of states did not get elected president.   In 1976, for example, Ford carried 54% of the states but lost the election.   Had the the union been formed more like the UN, he would have been the winner.

Has anyone counted up the times the state winner lost the election?
Logged
Lunar
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,404
Ireland, Republic of
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2004, 08:17:23 PM »

What it takes is a close election with the "city candidate" winning, since the candidate who wins the rural areas will win more states in that type of scenario.

We've had only a few close elections this last century.
Logged
nclib
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,300
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2004, 08:36:35 PM »

In addition to 1976, I think Nixon won more states in 1960.

It would be very difficult for a Democrat to win the majority of states anytime soon, especially without a strong third-party candidate (as in '92/'96).
Logged
rockhound
Rookie
**
Posts: 161


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2004, 11:56:32 AM »

By the way, welcome to the forum, rockhound!

Thank-you, glad I found it.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2004, 01:18:23 PM »

Nixon in 1960 is a good one.

I think he won 5 to 10 more states than Kennedy.

Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2004, 01:21:23 PM »

Welcome Rockhound. Good to see another Pennsylvanian in the forum.

In 1976 I believe Ford won more states than Carter.
Logged
rockhound
Rookie
**
Posts: 161


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2004, 02:40:59 PM »

Ok, here's the unofficial tally:

1976
Carter won with 23 states to Fords 27

1960
Kennedy won with 22 states to Nixon's 26 (Miss and Ala went elsewhere)

In both 1880 and 1884, the winner (Garfield and Taylor, respectively, tied for the most states with the runner up).

In 1800 and prior, electors were splitting their state votes so it gets hard to tell.

So there are just 2 real instances since 1800 where the winner of the most states did not win the election.   I believe there are more times that the winner of the popular vote did not win.  So it seems that winning the most states is a surer way to the White House, than winning the popular vote!

Note, also that never has anyone won while losing both the popular vote and the state count, though Garfield tying in states, and winning the popular vote by just .02% came close.
Logged
JohnFKennedy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,448


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 21, 2004, 02:54:42 PM »

I believe Benjamin Harrison lost the popular vote but won the electoral vote against Grover Cleveland when Harrison won the election.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2004, 02:40:21 PM »

Years where the popular vote winner lost:

1824

1876

1888

2000
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 23, 2004, 06:50:13 AM »

Years where the popular vote winner lost:

1824

1876

1888

2000
Although, again, 1824 is not a good example as the popular vote winner did win the electoral vote as well - he just fell short of 50% of EV's, then lost in the House.
Logged
Adlai Stevenson
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,403
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 16, 2007, 09:38:34 AM »

In 2008 if a Democratic President is elected it seems unlikely they will win a majority of states.  John Kerry could have won with just 21?, if he had carried Ohio in 2004.  I think the Democratic nominee in 2008 will carry more states than Kerry, but will fail to carry perhaps even half of the 50 states. 
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 18, 2007, 04:46:27 AM »

Years where the popular vote winner lost:

1824

1876

1888

2000

1960
Logged
AndrewTX
AndrewCT
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,091


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 18, 2007, 10:13:51 AM »

I don't really feel like counting it myself (lazy tonight), but what would be the minimum amount of states someone could win with?

14 states.

CA, TX, FL, OH, PA, IL, NY, WI, NJ, NY, MA, VA, MD, NC.

I'm sure it can be compiled differently, but I think 14 states, maybe 13 if I added wrong.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 19, 2007, 11:51:47 AM »

But, Kennedy got the votes where he needed them, in big states such as Texas, Illinois, and Michigan.

He stole the votes where he needed them.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 19, 2007, 12:23:06 PM »

But, Kennedy got the votes where he needed them, in big states such as Texas, Illinois, and Michigan.

He stole the votes where he needed them.

Was politics corrupt in 1960? Sure. Always has been, probably always will be to a certain extent. Both sides did it then, and still do today. It's equally deplorable from either party.

But you are too smart to get into those conspiracy theories about stolen elections.
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 0.038 seconds with 12 queries.