• OBJECTION!
    link
    fedilink
    020 days ago

    splitting hairs on my choice of words

    If I don’t keep y’all honest on terminology, you’ll say all kinds of ridiculous nonsense to make my side look bad, whether it’s “stealing votes” or “helping the other side.”

    It’s just a coincidence that in 1908 it was 6.4m vs 7.7m votes (dems and republicans respectively) and in 1912 it was 6.3m vs 3.5m + 4.1m (Dems vs republicans and progressives respectively)

    And in 1916, when there were only two major candidates, it was 9.1m democrat vs 8.5m republican.

    • @nyctre
      link
      120 days ago

      Exactly, thank you! People went back to voting republican again since there was no Roosevelt to split the vote! Now you’re getting it!

      • OBJECTION!
        link
        fedilink
        -120 days ago

        And lost. Because the electorate was shifting between 1908 and 1916, so there’s no reason to think that the results of 1912 would’ve been the same as 1908.