Sometimes a quote provides evidence or elucidates a point. Sometimes it fills a hole and makes you scratch your head. From a Politico piece on how the Electoral College might come into play in November:

[Former George H. W. Bush aide Lloyd] Green, who sees “about a 20 percent chance” of Obama winning the popular vote while losing the Electoral College, doesn’t expect anything resembling a blowout: “Given that the only clear and clean majorities [since 1992] were in 1996 and 2004, … this election will have the ferocity of all recent elections.”

Um. The sum total of presidential elections since 1992 is three: ’96, ’00, and ’04. Excluding ’96 and ’04 as being “clear and clean” (and under control?) leaves us with just one election.

Now, pointing out that ’00 was a messy election isn’t much of an insight (breaking—sky is blue!). And it’s tough to claim a trend when you only have three data points, and you yourself say two of them don’t support the thesis.

Here’s some help: Because of relatively strong showings by Ross Perot and Ralph Nader in ’92, ’96, and ’00, Bush’s 2004 result is the only time since 1988 where the victor took a “clear” majority of the popular vote. But even that election’s “cleanness” is disputed with a ferocity belying Green’s good-ol’-days tally. Oh well.