Wednesday, November 09, 2016

Hillary Clinton probably won the popular vote!

Hillary Clinton probably won the popular vote!

... albeit by a tiny margin - she's up by about 200,000 out of almost 120 million cast. And there are still votes to be counted here and there.

If that margin holds, Trump would become the fifth President to be elected with fewer votes than an opponent. He will join Hayes, Benjamin Harrison, J.Q. Adams, and George W. Bush in that exclusive club.

The two closest popular votes since 1900:

2. Al Gore won the popular vote by about 540,000 in 2000.

1. Kennedy beat Nixon by only 112,000 in 1960

The closest in history occurred in 1880 when James Garfield defeated Hancock by fewer than 2,000 votes.

Nixon had both the narrowest margin of defeat and the widest margin of victory. He defeated McGovern by almost 18 million in 1972.

The largest percentage victory in history belongs to neither Nixon nor FDR. Shockingly, a noted non-entity, Warren G Harding, won the 1920 election by 26.17 points!

1 comment:

  1. Every time this happens, voters on the losing side of the election whine about how unfair it is that their candidate got the most votes nationwide and still lost. I wish they'd just can it. Even Gore, when he thought he might win with less than half of the popular vote, warned his supporters in 2000 that "this is not a popularity contest." Then after he won the popular vote but lost the election, that became one bogus justification for challenging the results.

    Everyone knows the rules going in: it's a state-by-state game. If boosting the national vote count mattered, candidates would put ads, rallies and turnout efforts into densely-populated states they don't expect to win. But it doesn't, so they don't, and sometimes people win with a minority of the national popular vote. As it stands now, complaining about the overall popular vote might make Democrats feel better, but it's still meaningless, and as Trump would say, they're still losers.