Or did they? With so much vocalized discontent of the Bush administration, even though Pres Obama won by a lot, I ask why was it not a greater popular vote landslide? The election was an electoral vote landslide, but not necessarily a popular vote landslide. With so much media backing, and so much discontent you would think he would have won by a lot more. Having had the largest minority and younger generation turn out, and most of that vote going to Pres Obama, giving him his largest margin in his victory. I ask, why wasn't there a larger margin in the area of Wallstreet types, business men/women, corp world, etc? With the exception of possibly race what could be the reason?
Probably because most Americans refer to the far left and far right in the media as the vocal minority. Not a true representation of America as most are in the middle.
I'm starting to believe that the masses smoked...meaning smoked some very strong weed right before going to vote. How else can this mess be explained?
Because he's a liberal - very liberal. Nothing could make those people consider him as a candidate, regardless of how terrible of a job the Republicans have done.
As I recall, it was the largest difference in the popular vote in many, many elections so while it may not have been overwhelming by our terms, when you view recent elections it was.
Bush vs Gore & Bush vs. Kerry were very close. This was not as close but nowhere near a blowout or consensus. When Reagan won 44 out of 50 states in 1980 and 49 out of 50 in 1984...those were blowouts! Considering that the Democratic candidate had everything in their favor heading into election season, it's not as large a win as some would think. Considering how many wanted "change" regardless of experience, etc. you would think the margain would be wider.
Your talking electoral college. I believe the original question had to do with the popular vote which if you noticed I refered to. But since you bring it up, I don't think the difference in the popular vote has been this big since 84 with Reagan. Also note I never claimed it to be a landslide, I do recognize that difference was relatively small considering all the banter around this election. I was but merely commenting on the question asked and never gave an opinion on the matter.
Which is why I asked, because I haven't heard of a true breakdown that would explain why, with the discontent that there was, it wasn't a bigger popular vote blow out. Is this a question no one really wants to tackle? Media in particular. With the significance of Obama winning being the overwhelming accomplishment in history. Did the press not want to tackle the possible uglyness that does still exist in this country, as to not downplay this great achievement?
By "ugliness" do you mean that a lot of Americans didn't want to live in a socialist country? Maybe we showed our "ugliness" by expecting a presidential candidate to at least have a few qualifying life experiences. Just what is your definition of "ugliness"?
