The US has never had a legitimately-elected president, because legitimacy has only been possible in the last nine elections, and none of those presidents has received majority support from among the voting-age population (VAP). And as I’ve said before, the percentage of registered voters (RV) is not a valid indicator of support, because not voting is the same as voting “none of the above” (NOTA).
The first possible legitimate presidential election was 1972 (which Nixon “won” with 33.51% VAP), because the 26th amendment guaranteed the right of 18-year-olds to vote in 1971. If you’re old enough to fight and die for your country, then you’re old enough to have a say in how it is governed, and anyone who disagrees with that had better have a powerful argument.
If you reject the above (let me get some popcorn before you begin that argument), then the first possible legitimate presidential election must have been 1924 (which Coolidge “won”; % VAP unknown, but at 54.04% RV it couldn’t have been a majority), because it was the first where women from every state were able to participate fully (the 19th amendment, which guaranteed the right of women to vote, was ratified in time for the 1920 general election, but not the primaries, thus that election was not fully legitimate).
If you reject the above (I’ll get more popcorn), then the first possible legitimate presidential election must have been 1872 (which Grant “won”; % VAP unknown, but at 55.58% RV, again, it couldn’t have been a majority), because it was the first where (male) blacks were (technically) guaranteed the right to vote, by the 15th amendment (ratified 1870). I say “technically” because they were still disenfranchised through all manner of intimidation, especially in the south.
If you reject all the above, then you’re probably a racist, misogynist… monarchist… or something.
Incidentally, here are the VAP percentages for all nine post-26th-amendment presidential elections:
1972 - Nixon - 33.51% 1976 - Carter - 26.81% 1980 - Reagan - 26.67% 1984 - Reagan - 31.21% 1988 - Bush I - 26.77% 1992 - Clinton - 23.76% 1996 - Clinton - 24.12% 2000 - Bush II - 24.11% 2004 - Bush II - 28.49%
So there you have it, the closest we’ve had to a legitimate presidency is Nixon’s second term, to which he was elected by barely 1/3 of the electorate. I’ll leave it to the reader to decide which part of that sentence is more depressing.
More fun with numbers:
Interest in the upcoming election appears high, so participation will presumably be relatively high as well. But according to the source I’m using, the highest VAP turnout on record was 63.1% in 1960, when Kennedy beat Nixon by less than 113,000 votes (the source doesn’t have turnout records before then). That election was at least as hot as this one. Also, the highest winning RV percentage since 1824 (when the popular vote data begins), was 61.05% RV in 1964 (Johnson).
Assuming a generous (but unlikely) two-thirds VAP registration and turnout (using the 2004 VAP count, since I don’t have the current figure), and assuming the winner of the upcoming election takes two-thirds of the RV (also unlikely), then he would boast the support of over 44% of the electorate — better than Nixon, and probably the best ever, but still illegitimate.
July 15, 2008 at 4:21 pm
DD, it’s about time that this “democracy” under which we live be revealed for what it really is. Isn’t it sad, to realize how one vote doesn’t really matter all that much? 2000 should have been the wake-up call for everyone. I still can’t decide whether or not to vote this fall.
We didn’t even get into the whole farce that is the electoral college.
July 17, 2008 at 1:59 am
It is sad. I like the idea of proportional representation. I’m not an expert, so there may be negative aspects I’m unaware of, but the general idea sounds great, because everyone would seemingly have a better chance of having their voice heard voice in government.
I’m torn on the EC. The idea behind it is good: protect rural areas with sparse populations from being out voiced by urban areas with dense populations. I like that principle, on its face. Rural people often have vastly different lifestyles; what’s good for people in Manhattan is not necessarily good for people in the Adirondacks.
I just don’t know how to feel about it. It leads to anomalies (2000 wasn’t the first time), but I’m not comfortable trashing it without something to replace the good that it does. I keep meaning to research the various alternate proposals, but haven’t gotten around to it.
July 17, 2008 at 10:42 pm
I like the proportional representation approach. Many countries use it now. But I do think the EC is way outmoded. But it’s good you want to research all this more. I should do the same but there’s only so much time.