http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3321956Oh my.
I was hoping to see Pedro Picasso at this bonfire; Pedro Picasso of course being the one who still believes the Impeached One won the presidency in 1992 and 1996 by Rooseveltian or Reaganian proportions.
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 07:51 PM
Original message
Question: My Stepdad Says LIEberman Won In A "Landslide". Anybody Help Me Out?
He's a repuke, and I don't remember lieberman winning by any landslide. Thanks in advance for any help you can give me.
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. Won what? He lost his state party's nomination!
Lamont appears to have defeated Lieberman by more than 10,000 votes, according to unofficial vote returns. With 95 percent of the precincts reporting, Lamont led Lieberman 51.9 percent to 48.1 percent. The vote tally was 139,496 to 129,271. A hefty 42 percent of registered Democrats voted in the hotly contested primary, which many considered a referendum on the Iraq war.
http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2006...
Perhaps the bare blue primitive isn't aware who's the U.S. Senator from Connecticut most recently elected, or re-elected? Typical of a primitive.
tcfrogs (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. LIEberman beat Lamont in the General Election, though
Running as an independent.
bunkerbuster1 (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. If a 50-40 win is a "landslide," then Repuke Stepdad is correct.
I doubt most people would say that failing to win a clear majority of votes is a landslide, though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman#Senate_elect...
Most basic standard elementary Political Science 100 textbooks define a "landslide" as a margin of 10% or more.
But we're talking primitives here, who don't know excresence about politics.
And then:
Purveyor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. In the general election, where Lieberman won his senate seat:
Lieberman: 564,095 votes
LaMont: 450,844 votes
Schlesinger: 109,198 votes
Hmmm.
450,844 + 109,198 = 560,042
Looks like the blunkerbluster primitive in the comment about a "clear majority" has faulty arithmetic skills.
564,095 is more than 560,042, obviously a majority, and a clear one, of the vote.
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. Depends on how you define landslide
Since the republikkans are defining a 2-3% victory in 04 as a mandate, he may feel 10% is a landslide (in all fairness, that is fairly sizeable)
But, it's hardly a landslide in the LBJ (64), RR (84) and Clinton (96) vein.
Uh oh. The panned primitive's been drinking the same stuff Pedro Picasso's drunk.
Also, the panned primitive forgot to mention the landslides of 1972, 1980, and 1988.
DuStrange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 09:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Well, maybe not the Clinton '96 one.
According to the Wiki, the percentages were 49.24% for Clinton and 40.71% for Dole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential...
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 08:00 PM
Response to Original message
6. election results are here....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_United_States_...
Lieberman defeated Ned Lamont in the general election by 10 percentage points. That's a pretty hefty margin. Of course, MANY of those votes were crossover republicans or independents who would have likely voted republican under other circumstances.
Clovis Sangrail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
7. what constitutes a landslide?
He lost the party nomination by 4 pts and won the general by 10.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman#Senate_elect...
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Wed May-21-08 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
8. Lieberman won the 2006 CT election with 50% of the vote
...while Lamont got 40%. "Landslide victories" have a much bigger spread -- 20 percentage point difference or more. Calling Lieberman's win a landslide is akin to when Bush** called his 3% "victory" over Kerry a mandate.
Oh my.
The primitives, really, should read some of those easy-to-read, easy-to-understand, college freshman textbooks about politics. Such textbooks don't use big words or abstract concepts, and so should be easy to absorb.
