Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumJFK didn't win 1960 election--it was a tie
Nixon shouldn't have conceded:
JFK: 49.72%
Nixon: 49.55%
0.2% popular vote lead out of 68.8 million votes cast.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
10 replies, 783 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (1)
ReplyReply to this post
10 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
JFK didn't win 1960 election--it was a tie (Original Post)
book_worm
Feb 2016
OP
For the record, the Illinois recount found far more irregularities downstate than in Chicago.
ieoeja
Feb 2016
#8
And Bush beat Gore. Fortunately the Supremes quashed all that recount nonsense
Tom Rinaldo
Feb 2016
#6
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)1. I feel your pain
merrily
(45,251 posts)5. The Plurality Kid!
Recursion
(56,582 posts)2. And Chicago had about 102% turnout that year (nt)
LiberalArkie
(15,719 posts)4. I think Arkansas had a large casket electorate also.
Deny and Shred
(1,061 posts)7. Some established people with influence helped him out (nt)
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)8. For the record, the Illinois recount found far more irregularities downstate than in Chicago.
JFK's Illinois lead increased during the recount.
merrily
(45,251 posts)3. Please tell me you know Presidential elections don't work that way.
best response Merrily.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,913 posts)6. And Bush beat Gore. Fortunately the Supremes quashed all that recount nonsense
And you know that Iowa didn't settle anything. No one was being elected to an office there. If Hillary didn't brag so much about winning it would be OK, but she does. It is not about who gets to take office, it is about who did or did not do well there.
The accurate term to describe the Iowa results given how tight they were is: Inconclusive.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)9. Well and good if we were talking about a general election
but since it's assignment of delegates, and early in the process at that, 2/10 of a percent isn't really that significant. Yet.