But of all of FDR's reelections, only one, 1944, was a war time election. The others all happened during peacetime.
larry On 8/2/05, Howie Hamlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There's also another issue - Americans tend not to vote out a sitting > president in time of war (which is part of the reason why FDR won 4 terms). > With all of the drum pounding and talk of the "'war' on terror" I think there > were some voters who wanted to retain the status quo. > > Howie > > --- On Tuesday, August 02, 2005 11:52 AM, Gruss Gott scribed: --- > > > > That's an often heard but specious argument because it assumes that > > the voters are educated about the problems, the policy choices, and > > are choosing the best solutions. Or it assumes that all of the votes > > are idiots and all it takes is a smart person to manipulate them. > > > > Of course the truth is nowhere near there. Why people vote and who > > they vote for is a complicated phenomena: > > > > 1.) You've got your emotionally invested voters. They've aligned > > their self worth with a party and consider that party part of their > > identity so ding to the party is a ding to them personally. These are > > your rabid Limbaugh/Franken listeners. I'd put their numbers at about > > 50% or voters. > > > > 2.) Next, you've got your single issue voters. Whether it's abortion, > > gun control, labor, religion, etc. they vote on one issue. I'd say > > they're about 30% of voters. > > > > 3.) You've your basic suburban swing voters: the "soccer moms" or > > "NASCAR dads". They're about 18%. > > > > 4.) Finally you've got your policy/political package voters. These > > voters consider their personal situations, the policy landscape, and > > the political landscape making a decision for each election on how the > > completed gov't would look and act. These people will often vote > > different parties and have no allegiance to any party. They're the > > final 2% > > > > To win elections as a major party you usually need to get the swing > > 18% which is why you need millions and why candidates NEVER set > > metrics for policy. Which is why the policy ALWAYS fails. > > > > The calculus for the last presidential election split right down the > > middle so each party knew it needed a secret weapon to win. Repubs > > appealed to single issue voters and Dems to youth. > > > > The problem wasn't so much one of smarts but one of what secret > > weapons were available in key swing states. Which is another way of > > saying the party with the largest opportunity to pander usually wins. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:167580 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
