Final Tally: 332 - 206

[EmDot]

He had no mandate, and never did a thing about SS. But Bush did win by more of a spread than he did in his first term. Still, it was not a mandate, for whatever the term "mandate" means. When America woke up the day after the election in 2004, they found that nothing had changed. Bush still president, house and senate still controlled by republicans. When America woke up this past Wednesday, they found the same thing....nothing changed. Obama still president, house still controlled by republicans, senate still controlled by democrats. A little more than half the country voted to give the president another term, a little less than half voted for him to go. I hardly would call that a mandate.

And I didn't say Obama had a mandate, just pointed out the similarities. And I've already pointed out the problems many people had with voting. Maybe Republicans will try harder next time to suppress the vote. And it's already been mentioned that the fact that Republicans lost few seats (if any) was because of gerrymandering by Republican state legislatures.

Although the Republicans won 55 percent of the House seats, they received less than half of the votes for members of the House of Representatives. Indeed, more than half-a-million more Americans voted for Democratic House candidates than for Republicans House candidates. There was no split-decision. The Democrats won both the presidential election and the House election. But the Republicans won 55 percent of the seats in the House. This seems crazy. How could this be?

I will admit though that the Democrats in Maryland, at the least, gerrymandered Bartlett out of his seat. I would like to see independent commissions set up districts after the next census.

[Shell Beach]

HAHAHAHA I don't shriek on this board. I said President Bush said his 3M vote advantage and 286 electoral votes equaled a mandate.

I wasn't referring to you. Sorry for the confusion.

[Shell Beach]

I guess when Hilary wins you will once again say see you in 4 years than 4 more years. By that time the Republican Party will be a shadow of itself.

Good heavens, what will you be by that time, after you find out the gravy train has run out of money and has passed you by?

[georjec2]

Neither. Winning by 3-4% and roughly 3 million votes does not constitute a landslide nor a serious mandate. Had Romney pulled an upset, the difference would have been even less and not been a landslide. If you want an example of a landslide, go back to Reagan's victory over Mondale. All but one state and DC in the electoral vote and an 18 million vote difference in the popular vote. Now that is a landslide. Obama won by a bigger electoral and popular vote difference in 2008. He won this time, but there was obviously a little less enthusiasm for him the second time around.

3-4 million votes is only insignificant if you lost and the bubble hasn't yet burst.

If Obama won by 500k that would have been indisputable and he'd be no less the winner. To some republicans 3 million is unimpressive...because they lost. To some republicans 10 million would be unimpressive..if they lost.

[soulflower]

There were only ten states in play this Presidential election and Obama won all but one of those states. That's an arse whooping...

[MyTwoCents]

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4648

In 2004, George W. Bush won 50.7 percent of the popular vote over Democrat John Kerry, and had a 286-251 edge in electoral votes. As FAIR noted (Media Advisory, 11/5/04), many outlets proclaimed that to be a "mandate." "Clear Mandate Will Boost Bush's Authority, Reach," read a USA Today headline (11/4/04); NPR's Renee Montaigne said (11/3/04), "By any definition, I think you could call this a mandate."

So this week Barack Obama won re-election; before the Florida results were final, he had a 303-206 electoral vote advantage and 50.5 percent of the popular vote. What do you call that? For a lot of people in the media, definitely not a mandate.

I certainly wouldn't call it a landslide, but if George Bush was given a "mandate" in 2004, Obama's better results most certainly result in a mandate.