Bush won 30 states to Gore's 20. Guess it was a landslide.

[Zynx]

Jesus Christ people, I can accept the delegate arguments because those are proportional and also reflective of state populations, but don't get into this argument about land voting. If someone wins North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma, but loses Texas, if they were all on one night, who won? The answer is the winner of Texas because it has more people than all those states together.

[robbedvoter]

1. Yeah, the ol' acres vs voters argumet - they had T-shirts with thst one in 2000

[tridim]

2. You do understand that primaries aren't winner take all, right?

The GE is a completely different animal.

[Zynx]

5. That would seem to favor my argument more.

[LiberalFighter]

7. You understand that Texas (34) is not equal to Rhode Island (4) in November?

And there are a couple of states that do not use winner take all for GE.

[doc03]

3. Exactly, remember the red map the Republicans

used, if going by land area Bush won by 10-1 over gore.

[Seen the light]

4. Who said either was a landslide?

2000 was a very narrow contest as was last night's. Not a single Obama supporter has characterized last night as a "landslide."

[Zynx]

6. Oh yes they have. I interpret "clear win" as being landslide.

[grantcart]

8. why was Obama able to get more votes in Illinois than

Hillary in NY - what do they know?

[Zynx]

10. In NY only registered Democrats can vote as I recall.

[BootinUp]

9. LOL, L A N D S L I D E!