By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
dsgrue3 said:
GameOver22 said:
dsgrue3 said:
chocoloco said:

 

By the way, the popular vote still shows a lead for Romney. That does not matter as swing state polls are continually favoring Obama.


History proves otherwise. Only one time in our history as a country has a President received +3% of the popular vote and lost the election. Samuel J. Tilden - 1876.

Why +3 percent? That seems like an arbitrary and cherry-picked number.


That's what occurred in 1876. If you disclude that election, no President has received +1% nationally and lost the electoral vote.

RCP Average 10/15 - 10/24 -- -- 47.9 47.0 Romney +0.9
Rasmussen Reports 10/22 - 10/24 1500 LV 3.0 50 47 Romney +3
ABC News/Wash Post 10/21 - 10/24 1386 LV 3.0 50 47 Romney +3
IBD/TIPP 10/19 - 10/24 948 LV 3.5 45 47 Obama +2
Gallup 10/18 - 10/24 2700 LV 2.0 50 47 Romney +3
Associated Press/GfK 10/19 - 10/23 839 LV 4.2 47 45 Romney +2
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun 10/18 - 10/21 1402 LV 2.6 48 45 Romney +3
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 10/17 - 10/20 816 LV 3.4 47 47 Tie

Yeah, I know that, but a candidate only needs to win +.00001 percent of the vote to win the popular vote. Using +1 is just as arbitrary as using +3. The point is that its perfectly feasible to lose the popular vote and win the election (there's a reason why candidates focus on swing states while ignoring  the non-competitive states).

To put bluntly, candidates aren't stupid. They don't try to win the popular vote. They try to win the Electoral College.