Another Karl Rove Distortion

[GitRDun]

President Obama is the 1st President in history to receive less popular vote in his reelection year than he did in his initial election year.

1932 - Franklin D. Roosevelt: 22,821,277 votes
1936 - Franklin D. Roosevelt: 27,752,648 votes
1940 - Franklin D. Roosevelt: 27,313,945 votes
1944 - Franklin D. Roosevelt: 25,612,916 votes

After 1936, FDR got less votes in each subsequent election. Not bad company to be in.

[JackN415]

1. Given Rove, you know that you misquote him...

without the full context. "Less popular in the second term than in the first term" , not the 3rd term vs. 2nd term or the 4th term vs. the 3rd term....


Or.. The first President who receives less popular votes in a subsequent re-election not named "FDR"

There is a first of everything if you put in enough of qualifiers.

[Tennessee Hillbilly]

2. Rove must be awfully desperat

Rove must be awfully desperate for a silver lining if this is the best he can come up with. I doubt that this will satisfy all the wealthy people that gave money to his PAC.

[budkin]

3. What was his point in even pointing that out?

Grasping at straws?

[imgbitepolitic]

4. Cry

Me a river

[Filibuster Harry]

5. So ... he won !!!

WTF? trying to find something positive. Look Rove -- you guys were suppose to take the senate and the white house but you didn't. Enough said. Keep it up I am having a ball with this!!

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. Obama's margin of victory greater than Bush's in both pop and electoral: BOTH CAMPAIGNS

Obviously, both of Obama's campaigns had a greater margin of victory than Bush's 2000 effort, where Bush LOST the popular vote.

But both Obama's elections have a greater margin of victory than the 2004 election, which Bush won by 3,012,166 votes. In 2008, that was obvious: Obama won by 10,000,000 votes. In 2012, however, Barack Obama also exceeded Bush's second term victory margin: he's currently up by 3,022,000 votes!

So much for the mandate!