Talk:Redskins Rule

article history issues

This page was originally called "Redskin Rule" (without the "s" at the end of Redskin) and a lot of editing was done to it before the change was made. Can that history be merged back in? 128.12.191.93 (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

The merge was messy because both pages already existed [1] [2]. You can see much of the original history at

• History from Redskin rule
• Washington_Redskins#Superstition_regarding_US_Presidential_elections

Nimur (talk) 23:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Redskins rule revision

I am confused by the statement that the redskins rule has been changed with the revised rule. Wouldnt a revised rule about the popular vote mean that while it would keep 2004 as maitaining the rule (since a different party won the popular vote in 2004 than 2000) wouldnt that revision just shift the error to 2000. The same party that won the popular vote in 2000 was also the winner in 1996, so in 2000, according to the "revised" redskins rule, the democrats were supposed to lose the popular vote because they won the popular vote in 1996. Crd721 (talk) 10:37, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I also noticed this, and thought it was worth a revision. Fixed. 173.88.88.117 (talk) 20:16, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

It breaks the rule, but it's worth noting - I say keep it in.

174.102.226.178 (talk) 03:04, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

No, the loss they are supposed to have is the election, which they did lose in 2000. The popular vote only counts for the first part of the rule. I'm changing it back. --Dagko (talk) 17:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

To clarify, when the Redskins win, the party which won the popular vote in the prior election will win the electoral vote (and thus win) in the upcoming election. .אבי נ (talk) 20:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks bad for this year. This rule will be a relic of the past - Primetime — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.7.142.101 (talk) 21:24, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I understand why my addition -- regarding throwback uniforms (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Redskins_Rule&oldid=521832450) was removed (original research), but whether anyone else has "published" it or not, it is still a fact that a new modified rule would be that "whenever the Redskins win their last home game wearing non-throwback uniforms, the incumbent popular vote winning party wins the election." Even if I'm the only one to have pointed it out or not, it's still fact. I'm not trying to make waves about Wikipedia's original research policy, so leave it out, that's fine, but it's still a fact, you can't change it, and by not including it the article isn't as accurate as it could be. ROB 14:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Corrections

I found a number of the games were reported incorrectly, someone listed Washington's last game before the election, not their last home game. I have corrected the table to display the correct opponents and scores. Jacob1207 (talk) 02:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

In the first section it should say that the rule was from 1940 to 2012 as with the revised rule it was upheld in 2004. Also, Obama won 303 electoral votes and won the popular vote http://www.google.com/elections/ed/us/results. Please someone change this who has permission to do so — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.236.64.64 (talk) 12:07, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Was the rule broken in 2004? (And other questions)

Was the rule broken because Bush defeated Kerry in 2004, but the Redskins lost that year to the Packers? I would like a reduction in the amount of edits made to this page. In addition, is there a single rule or are there two versions of the rule? (And if there are two, then should both be noted or just one of the rules?) --204.106.251.214 (talk) 23:18, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the Redskins lost to the Packers in their last home game before the 2004 election, which would have predicted that George W. Bush lose to John Kerry. That obviously didn't happen. Hirdt when on to explain that due to the 2000 election, in which Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Bush won the electoral vote and the White House, the Redskins Rule "reversed polarity", causing the opposite result to happen in the next election. Although if Obama wins tomorrow, it could also initiate the Patriots Exception to the rule -- if the challenger is from Patriots country (e.g. Massachusetts), then if the Redskins lose their last home game prior to the election, the incumbent party remains in the White House. WTF? (talk) 14:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

How did 2000 begin a "four game losing streak with retrospect to the rule?" Wouldn't that mean that 2008 was somehow a fail? 68.186.165.160 (talk) 04:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Media Mention

Well, Rush talked about this article today on his show... which probably explains why it is now protected.74.124.47.11 (talk) 20:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Bush won the popular vote and electoral college in 2004, just FYI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.203.180.52 (talk) 20:42, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Color-coding in the table

Is it possible to explain the color-coding used in the table? For me, no clear pattern emerged, but I presume the colors have to represent something, or they would not be used. 2A02:8070:D18D:5E00:D8C7:B80C:DCFF:E150 (talk) 19:53, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Red is Republican victory and Blue is Democratic. The blue color used in the table looks absolutely awful though, like some weird shade of salmon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.151.179.5 (talk) 22:48, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Protections for this page

Somebody please protect this page so that only people with a Wikipedia account can edit it. - Joshua Haralson 130.108.197.212 (talk) 05:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

No, guests should be allowed to edit, too. Or at least add to this talk page. Such as:

• "Why, in 2016, wasn't the Redskins last official home game (played in London) included? That game ended in a tie. Therefore, the election was going to be a split decision. The challenging party won the electoral vote, but the incumbent party won the popular vote". If the media had realized that the London game was the last home game, the rule would apply"*2602:306:CD9B:E9A0:5560:1889:FD95:84E (talk) 01:31, 20 December 2016 (UTC)ES

• The Redskins were not the nominal home team for their 2016 London game. Surachit (talk) 18:21, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

State of this page after the Redskins rename

There will inevitably be an RM if the 2020 season gets underway as planned, because the team has renamed themselves. This means the team will play a "Redskins Rule" game under a name other than Redskins – however, no sources have come up with a new name for this "rule", and 2012 may have ended the superstition anyway. O.N.R. ^(talk) 18:02, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

I have added this to the project pages.[3], [4] --DB1729 (talk) 19:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)