[sinanju]

Yes, but wasn’t the real reason Lincoln won in 1860 was because it was a bizarre four-way election?

[ProudFossil]

Partially correct. However we are looking at a backwoods lawyer who was splitting with the power group in his state and was able to attract a following that escalated to a national group that was able to beat the entrenched power structure at a national level. Remember the Whigs (and Democrats) had been around for a hundred years and had powerful men at all levels of government. And yet they could not keep the party together.

The important fact here is that Lincoln was a LEADER. If there exists such a person now in the 20 million Rush listeners, then it is very possible to have a major party within two years, especially with the bs that the Zero is doing. The need for a leader is key to the process.

[Non-Sequitur]

Yes, but wasn’t the real reason Lincoln won in 1860 was because it was a bizarre four-way election.

No. Lincoln took 180 out of 303 electoral votes. If you look at the returns in 1860, Lincoln won clear majorities in states with 173 our of those 180 of those votes. In other words had he lost California and Oregon he still would have won the presidency.