I am guessing Apoc said it to trigger someone, bait someone(yay me) or just wants to make trumps victory sound greater than it was for one reason or another. none of which are really necessary. Unless he believes any victory, however small is a landslide, which makes nearly every election a landslide, which means none of them really were.
Trump's win wasn't a landslide but it was more impressive than just about every other US election in modern history, certainly far bigger than Obama's wins in 2012 and 2008. This was a David vs Goliath contest-Trump had just about every disadvantage going yet still came out on top and proved everyone wrong in the process. I think it was the first time ever that the candidate who spent less actually won, and given the US is a plutocracy that's the most significant point to take away.
tbh, the millions spent on ads didn't really do anything, and was just a waste of money. Every one knew the 2 candidates well enough, especially after the news coverage. both sides could of just abandoned the ads and nothing would of changed, at least for the presidential election imo. it would of saved millions anyways.
I am guessing Apoc said it to trigger someone, bait someone(yay me) or just wants to make trumps victory sound greater than it was for one reason or another. none of which are really necessary. Unless he believes any victory, however small is a landslide, which makes nearly every election a landslide, which means none of them really were.
Trump's win wasn't a landslide but it was more impressive than just about every other US election in modern history, certainly far bigger than Obama's wins in 2012 and 2008. This was a David vs Goliath contest-Trump had just about every disadvantage going yet still came out on top and proved everyone wrong in the process. I think it was the first time ever that the candidate who spent less actually won, and given the US is a plutocracy that's the most significant point to take away.
if one wants to say it is impressive, or argue it, i can see their point, and depending on what is said, agree with it. I didn't have any doubt that the race would be close. i didn't really care what the polls said. I had that gut feeling it would be close, even after all the various "scandals" both sides had. sure enough it was. and i remember some of the polls showing this.
i didn't see the race being David vs Goliath. both had their major weaknesses that were clearly shown every single day.(yay being a swing state) i recall some of the polls being fairly close, and some of the national polls not being too far off the end result(with hillary having more support than trump by a few %)
and i don't really see beating polls or expectations being a landslide. there are other adjectives one would use, that make sense, rather than saying it is a landslide.(especially in apocs sentence if that is what he was trying to convey) and his margin in the EC wasn't that large. he barely got PA and MI.(both by less than a 1% if memory serves) He got 304(or whatever) by a very thin margin. and if you want to see a modern landslide victory, look at Nixon vs mcgovern.
polls are iffy at best. quite a few of them are bogus.