Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: gleeaikin
You're looking at it all wrong. Look what happened in 1992.

POPULAR VOTE
Clinton -- 43%
Bush -- 37%
Perot -- 19%

ELECTORAL VOTES
Clinton -- 370
Bush -- 168
Perot -- 0

It's not a majority of the POPULAR VOTE that drives the results. It's the ELECTORAL VOTE. And the last time a third party candidate even won a single state in a presidential election was George Wallace in 1968.

And if Donald Trump ran as an independent in 2020 and somehow nobody won a majority of the Electoral Vote, do you honestly expect Congress -- comprised almost entirely of Democrats and Republicans -- to elect him to the White House?

162 posted on 11/09/2019 4:13:46 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("In the time of chimpanzees I was a monkey.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child

you do understand that Clinton only got that many electoral votes because perot split the vote in many states and those electoral votes then went to clinton instead of Bush right?


164 posted on 11/09/2019 6:45:12 PM PST by gdc61 (LOL not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child

because it IS the popular vote in each state the decides the electors.

so without a doubt Bush only lost due to the split vote.


165 posted on 11/09/2019 6:47:42 PM PST by gdc61 (LOL not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson