How about Electoral votes: Bush, 520. Europhiles 17?
I really believe that North Vietnam may have been willing to get serious about peace talks in 1968 had our media (esp. TV) been more balanced reporting on the Tet offensive. Certainly Nixon believed that they would or he'd make them. He won just under 1 million more popular votes than Humphrey.
What Nixon did not know was that the American press was about to strip down to their black pajamas and earn the coveted General Giap "Most Valuable Guerilla Award." The establishment leftist fed the press efforts. Nevertheless, in 1972 Nixon won by a little more than 60 percent of the popular vote and won all states but one. Electoral votes: 520 to 17. There was one "blue" state.
Less than two years later he was out and the Communist had their victory assured. Nixon's plumbers' dirty tricks? How about Dick Tuck? Who? Aw, that Dick Tuck, the Democrats' dirty tricks were humorous -- you know, like today their lies and violent language are just satire.
Though both parties bugged each other nevertheless, months after the break in, the left tried the Watergate "issue." The Watergate frenzy began. Watergate was an "issues" nuke weapon that destroyed a wartime administration.
The left is desperate to find an "issue" nuke weapon today. So far nothing they've tried has worked. Losing all fifty states to George Bush won't stop them.
IMO the left desperately wants to use the war to transfer much of our sovereignty and military to the UN or other international control. Some of them actually feeeeeeeeeeeeeel that it is best. For example, Madeline Allbright said on the Medved radio show that she would give up sovereignty for "safety."
The ends justify the means. To fight that it's going to take exceptional acts. Mere elections ain't enough history has proven.