Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: cowboyway
I wouldn't characterize 39% as 'popular', but keep on spinning, liar.

He was more that 10 points more popular than his nearest opponent. And it's no spin to say for a fact that even had Lincoln had only 1 opponent and if he'd still gotten only 39% of the vote then he'd still have been president.

You can hardly call just over 50% of the popular vote a resounding mandate.

But you can certainly say that getting 90% of the electoral votes was.

270 posted on 05/08/2009 5:54:43 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
He was more that 10 points more popular than his nearest opponent.

You can try to characterize it anyway you want to but the bottom line is that only 39% for means that 61% were against.

And it's no spin to say for a fact that even had Lincoln had only 1 opponent and if he'd still gotten only 39% of the vote then he'd still have been president.

You're getting more absurd and irrational with every post.

But you can certainly say that getting 90% of the electoral votes was.

More absurdity.

Example: In 2008, Obama got 50.9% of the popular vote in Florida but he got 100% of the electoral college votes.

BTW, who are you saying got 90% of the electoral votes?

293 posted on 05/09/2009 5:28:16 AM PDT by cowboyway ("The beauty of the Second Amendment is you won't need it until they try to take it away"--Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


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