• OBJECTION!
    link
    fedilink
    -15 hours 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
      24 hours 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
        -14 hours 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.