Posted on 09/19/2012 9:58:17 AM PDT by kristinn
George W. Bush did it in 2000. So did John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes and Benjamin Harrison.
Could President Obama be next?
It’s not often that a presidential candidate wins the election while losing the popular vote, but polling suggests it could happen again in 2012 if the race tightens just a bit.
A handful of new polls today show President Obama leading in important battleground states. Surveys by CBS-New York Times-Quinnipiac rate him ahead in Virginia (50-46 percent) and Wisconsin (51-45 percent), while erasing a Romney lead in Colorado to pull ahead narrowly (48-47 percent).
The last batch of swing-state polls, released Thursday by NBC/Wall Street Journal/Marist, showed Obama leading in Ohio (50-43 percent), Florida (49-44 percent) and Virginia.
That’s good news for Obama, and if the election were held today, they indicate that Obama would be the favorite.
But national polling remains very close. Since Romney secured his party’s nomination in April, neither candidate has gained much separation.
President Obama’s single-digit convention bounce has mostly evaporated. ABC News-Washington Post polling showed him leading Mitt Romney 50-44 percent after the conventions, and Gallup’s daily tracking poll concurred. Now, Gallup shows the two candidates virtually tied: Obama leads 47-46 percent, the exact same numbers Gallup reported as the GOP convention began in Tampa.
SNIP
But at various points in the election cycle, polls have shown Republicans more excited about voting in November 2012 than Democrats. If a lagging economy and a lack of excitement deflate Obama’s vote totals in safely Democratic states, boost Romney’s total in red states, and makes swing states more competitive, Obama could surpass 269 Electoral College votes while seeing Romney become the next Al Gore.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
It all depends on who is counting the votes... remember?
“George W. Bush did it in 2000.”
Only because California went so overwhelmingly for Gore.
While Gore’s total popular vote over Bush was 500,000 votes, his margin in California alone was a couple of million.....
Do the math and you can see why the Dems are always talking about eliminating the Electoral College that essentially eliminates the effects of “piling on” in certain large population states.
Zero might just win if people vote third party or stay home because Romney isn’t “pure” enough for them.
There’s a clique of these cement-headed clowns right here on FR.
Imagine that...
What about that Popular vote movement, which now requires electors is some 10+ states to vote for the winner of the national polualr vote, REGARDLESS of the outscome of their respective state vote...they would change their mind faster than thos who supported the Hitler/Stalin pact.
No, that's only if there is a tie in the electoral college. Whoever wins the electoral college wins -- the popular vote is completely irrelevant.
Saying that George Bush failed to win the popular vote in 2000 ignores the rampant voting fraud all over the country that year. In countless precincts, more votes were counted than there were registered voters. In Florida, CBS (-and others?) called the election before the polls were closed, causing a quarter million Florida Republicans to stay home. We had the bizarre Carnahan trick in St. Louis of polling hours being extended (illegal, and clearly pre-planned). Plus, we must not forget that then-Vice President Gore sent out millions of voter registrations to non-citizens. NOBODY should accept the lie that Bush failed to win the popular vote in 2000. He won despite millions of illegally cast votes because Republicans stood their ground in Florida, waging a courageous battle of wills against the Democrat tyrant liars who were disputing chads, punching ballots from the backs of their cars and “finding” extra ballot boxes.
None of this matters, because the MSM told us that Romney lost the election last week and again on Monday. If he keeps on losing the election every few days, then he’ll wind up winning the popular vote but lose the electoral vote, or something.
Maybe he is refering to 1968 and 1992 where the winner did not receive a majority of the popular vote (but a plurality) but won the election.
Are you playing 'devil's advocate' again?
My sixth grade teacher then was a DFL'er and had some wishful thinking I guess. ; )
No, it isn’t going to happen.
Obama’s high margins in states like California guarantee that he won’t.
California makes the reverse more likely to happen.
Nope.
I meant that one.
We should all be willing to crawl over broken glass to vote for Willard because America will not survive another 0bama term.
No, Romney wasn’t my first choice either, but compared to the Marxist we have now, Romney’s almost Goldwater.
If 90 percent of the commies and illegal aliens in NY and California vote Obama, he can pile up huge numbers of votes and easily win the popular vote. Who cares? The rest of us aren’t bound by the extreme liberalism of a few populous states. The nation was wisely set up to ensure that the president was elected by a broad swath of the nation.
Nixon got a plurality but not a majority.
Nixon 43.4%
Humphrey 42.7%
Wallace 13.5%
This election is Romney's to win or lose. We all saw his performance during the primaries. He can repeat that performance again or go back to living off his investments. He wanted this gig, so let him lead. Oh and before you come unglued I have not yet decided IF I can vote for him, but, I do like Ryan.
The GOP Controls the House and if it were to come down to Romney winning the popular vote while losing the Electoral College vote, the House would have to take actions to follow the wishes of the majority of the voters.
The President is elected via the Electoral College not the popular nationwide vote.
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2011/08/09/california-votes-to-relinquish-electoral-votes/
Exactly so. If Obama loses the popular vote - he ain’t winning the election.
I don’t think that will happen. His unpopularity is highly, highly, under-reported.
The media loves...even WORSHIPS Obamugabe, and they refuse to believe or report on a contrary point of view.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.