History Shows Clintons And Bushes Are NOT Electoral Juggernauts ... and recent history shows those are about the only pair of boobs that the Rats and Rino's want.
Posted on 04/27/2015 5:01:16 AM PDT by cotton1706
Let’s test your presidential election knowledge. In how many presidential elections did Bill Clinton win a majority of the popular vote?
The answer, of course, is zero.
That’s right. In 1992, Bill Clinton won his first presidential term with just 43 percent of the vote. Republican George H. W. Bush received 37.5 percent. Ross Perot — America’s proto-tea partier — received 18.9 percent (without receiving a single Electoral College vote).
In 1996, Clinton nearly managed to claw his way over the 50 percent barrier. But he didn’t. The New Democrat eked out a second plurality victory with only 49.2 of the vote. Bob Dole, his Republican opponent, garnered 40.7 percent. In a second try, Perot wound up with 8.4 percent of the total 1996 presidential vote (and still not a single Electoral College vote).
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
History Shows Clintons And Bushes Are NOT Electoral Juggernauts ... and recent history shows those are about the only pair of boobs that the Rats and Rino's want.
Hillary lost by barely a hair, close enough that it could fall either way depending on the super delegate count. Supers could vote independently from their state popular results. The popular vote between Hill and Barry was a very thin difference in the important states. Supers could have reasonably voted for Hillary. To Hillary’s dismay, they stood firm for Obama.
Be careful who our super delegates really are.
Hillary likely would have lost by a wider margin were it not for Rush Limbaugh and Operation Chaos.
I believe that had people crossing over to vote FOR Obama and against the supposedly invincible Hillary.
I voted just the opposite, with Rush Chaos, not for her but against Hillary. At our precinct and county conventions we voted for Barksalot to stop Hillary.
Then in the general, we voted for Bob Barr, over McCain-Palin in the general. No way would we touch anything close to John McCain. He was and is a progressive and everybody knew it, then and now.
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.