Professor Bainbridge brings to our attention this LA Times article (registration required, alas, and ‘laexaminer’ doesn’t seem to work) that claims that every single time that the Washington Redskins loses or ties their last game before a Presidential election, the sitting President loses the election as well. This streak has apparently been unbroken for 72 years.
The weasel words are mostly because, well, is there any need to research this one? There’s no causal link between lost Redskins games and lost elections, and if magic worked no President would last a week under the combined pressure of several million minds all inexpertly (yet massively) beaming mean thoughts at him. Forget strokes: we’d be talking Scanner type head explosions.
That being said, I’m sure that this little tidbit of statistical fluff will add a touch of interest to the game in question…
(Via OTB)
You can register for free at the LAT, like most papers’ websties, under whatever made-up name you want; it takes about a minute, and is worth doing, IMO.
I remember hearing this in 2000, and that it applied across the board for the sitting president’s party. That year, the Skins were playing the Tennessee Titans, just off their Super Bowl appearance…and as a former Nashville resident, I had a soft spot, but as an old-school Southern Democrat and deep-dyed Redskins fan, it was quite the brutal finish.
Seems like there was some sort of correlation with the World Series at one time, too: an AL victory meant a Republican win and the NL led the Democrats to victory. This broke in 1992, possibly because of Bush I’s excessive identification with the Braves on the Southern campaign trail…
I say it’s at LEAST as valid as an Internet poll ;]
“laexaminer” may not work anymore, but bselig/bselig still does.
If it applies across the board for the sitting president’s party, it has a great deal more statistical heft. Did they win on a technicality? Work the ref?