Skip to content

Writing off the Redskins Rule

Carolina Panthers v Washington Redskins Getty Images

I’ve tried to ignore mentioning the so-called “Redskins Rule,” which purports to predict the outcome of the presidential election based on the performance of the team that plays in the city (or at least close to it) where the Commander-in-Chief resides.

But I’ve decided that it’s worth addressing it, if only to say how ridiculous it is that anyone would give it any credence.

It’s a coincidence at the very best, the idea that if the Redskins win their final home game, the incumbent party wins the presidency and that, if the Redskins lose their final home game, the non-incumbent party wins.  The fact that the “Redskins Rule” didn’t hold in 2004 is largely ignored, since it proves the trend wrong, giving the media one less meaningless story line to push.

So we’re suggesting that everyone ignore this stupid coincidence between what the Redskins do and what the nation will do.  And not just because it offends the intelligence of folks with at least reasonable intelligence.  But because plenty of people with less than reasonable intelligence who watch networks like ESPN and possess the inalienable right to vote may decide not to vote because the outcome of the last Redskins home game has made their vote moot.

Permalink 45 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
45 Responses to “Writing off the Redskins Rule”
  1. baywatchboy says: Nov 6, 2012 3:05 PM

    Someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed

  2. 50milessouthofdetroit says: Nov 6, 2012 3:05 PM

    Why don’t we just wait and see if it’s upheld this year before blasting it. and i do think that it is a coincidence

  3. goniners49 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:05 PM

    Obama. Landslide.

  4. maddog111 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:06 PM

    “But because plenty of people with less than reasonable intelligence who watch networks like ESPN and possess the inalienable right to vote may decide not to vote because the outcome of the last Redskins home game has made their vote moot.”
    ———————————————-
    Anyone who would skip voting based on this logic shouldn’t be voting anyway.

  5. hamishfraser says: Nov 6, 2012 3:06 PM

    I think it is kinda cool, albeit a complete coincidence

  6. realitypolice says: Nov 6, 2012 3:09 PM

    Ummm……I’m pretty sure that everyone realizes it’s a coincidence. Besides reporting it, I haven’t actually heard anyone say there is an actual connection.

    And someone stupid enough to believe there is a connection probably shouldn’t be voting anyway.

  7. briang123 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:09 PM

    And if they won it would have been at the top of your page since Sunday at around 4:00.

  8. hard2be4skins says: Nov 6, 2012 3:09 PM

    I, for one, form my decision post skins game. Don’t sleep on the redskins rule vote.

  9. whatjusthapped says: Nov 6, 2012 3:09 PM

    I hope to God it applies in 2012 because that means the end of socialized medicine (Obamacare), the promotion of food stamps, and an increase in jobs and take home pay.

  10. boltnut says: Nov 6, 2012 3:10 PM

    Well said.

  11. beecee71 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:10 PM

    If people aren’t going to vote because of the Redskin rule then they probably shouldn’t be voting anyway.

  12. cdsaints says: Nov 6, 2012 3:10 PM

    If you are so dumb that you think the outcome of a football game will predict the outcome of an election, then please do us all a favor and stay home on election day.

  13. alphilip77 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:11 PM

    If it’s so stupid, why are you acknowledging it by writing an article about it?

  14. rpiotr01 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:14 PM

    Everyone knows what the REAL Redskins Rule is: So long as Dan Snyder owns the team the Redskins will not seriously approach Super Bowl contention.

  15. mjbulls45 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:14 PM

    its obama.

    there is no drama to it.

  16. steelerben says: Nov 6, 2012 3:20 PM

    alphilip77 says:
    Nov 6, 2012 3:11 PM
    If it’s so stupid, why are you acknowledging it by writing an article about it?

    ———————————————–

    But I’ve decided that it’s worth addressing it, if only to say how ridiculous it is that anyone would give it any credence.

  17. bagatelle69 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:21 PM

    There is also the coincidence that every election held on Nov. 6th is a win for Republicans (since 1860).

  18. xxwhodatxx says: Nov 6, 2012 3:21 PM

    I pray it stands true this election year.

  19. CKL says: Nov 6, 2012 3:32 PM

    I think it’s interesting but not “post hoc ergo propter hoc”. How different is it really from when media says things like “Reid never loses after a bye” etc. It doesn’t really mean anything prediction wise because “any given Sunday” any one team can beat another. Same goes for this fact.

  20. justintuckrule says: Nov 6, 2012 3:34 PM

    whatjusthapped says:
    Nov 6, 2012 3:09 PM
    I hope to God it applies in 2012 because that means the end of socialized medicine (Obamacare), the promotion of food stamps, and an increase in jobs and take home pay.
    ————-
    Mark Cuban, is that you?

  21. surran70065 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:38 PM

    Funny how everthing is a “stupid coincidence” when it favors the Republicans, but is considered gospel when it favors the Democrats.

  22. justintuckrule says: Nov 6, 2012 3:38 PM

    whatjusthapped says:
    Nov 6, 2012 3:09 PM
    I hope to God it applies in 2012 because that means the end of socialized medicine (Obamacare), the promotion of food stamps, and an increase in jobs and take home pay.
    ————————————–
    Correctamundo. If Romney is elected it will mean the end of an increase in jobs and the end of an increase in take home pay.

  23. fancyleague says: Nov 6, 2012 3:39 PM

    Well I’m writing back in the Redskins Rule! Double stamped it, no erasies!

    And don’t even think about triple stamping my double stamp.

  24. northshorejag says: Nov 6, 2012 3:39 PM

    yes. it wasn’t true in 2004

    the other 18 times it was

  25. dallascowboysdishingthereal says: Nov 6, 2012 3:39 PM

    I think the stats are stronger than a coincedence yet pretty much impossible to explain. Perhaps the Redskin nation feels good when they win about how things are going but bad when they lose so vote for change?

    It can’t be explained but it has been consistent enough to not be ignored.

  26. deltaoracle says: Nov 6, 2012 3:48 PM

    According to the ads and internet, we’re either going to be led by a Muslim who wants to take away our guns, beer and pickups and make us slave to support welfare queens, or by a modern Ebenezer Scrooge who only believes in saying anything that will get him elected and will make us slave to support his billionaire puppet masters. In other words, it’s a win either way.

  27. godofwine330 says: Nov 6, 2012 3:55 PM

    Tell ‘em Florio. It is silly that people still give these BS stories the time of day.

    Now I am about to get off work in 30 minutes, vote for the incumbent and pray that my voting machine lets me do that unlike the machines in Pennsylvania who had people voting for the other guy when they picked another guy.

  28. texansmike says: Nov 6, 2012 4:12 PM

    and the Madden curse ain’t true either. Hum??

  29. kylexitron says: Nov 6, 2012 4:16 PM

    the fact that it was wrong in 2004 only proves that bush should have never been the incumbant in the first place, but everone already knows that election was a sham.

  30. ubummer says: Nov 6, 2012 4:18 PM

    Actually, the real reason you’re addressing it is to dismiss it because you’ve shown your leftist bias in the past. If the Redskin Rule favored Obama, it would have been touted by all the lame stream media, and all you’re doing is toeing the company line.

  31. dukemarc says: Nov 6, 2012 4:24 PM

    justintuckrule says:
    Nov 6, 2012 3:38 PM
    whatjusthapped says:
    Nov 6, 2012 3:09 PM
    I hope to God it applies in 2012 because that means the end of socialized medicine (Obamacare), the promotion of food stamps, and an increase in jobs and take home pay.
    ————————————–
    Correctamundo. If Romney is elected it will mean the end of an increase in jobs and the end of an increase in take home pay.
    —————————-

    Like it has over the past four years? ::eye roll::

  32. smokingconch says: Nov 6, 2012 4:28 PM

    The reason people don’t care that it didn’t work in 2004 is because that was the year Gore won the popular vote, but lost the election. The redskins rule still held, the challenger receieved more votes.

  33. duncanthecat says: Nov 6, 2012 4:38 PM

    I never thought something good would come out of my beloved Redskins losing.

  34. dcsween says: Nov 6, 2012 4:52 PM

    Just to be clear, there were so many pencil and eraser smudges at right tackle, I intentionally did not include Jammal Brown.

  35. philswfc08 says: Nov 6, 2012 4:54 PM

    it should already be known that the coincidence holds true again this year…there are way too many people with less than reasonable intelligence that are making it close because they vote blindly.

  36. sactogary says: Nov 6, 2012 5:32 PM

    It’s only weird if it doesn’t work.

  37. thewizardofbs says: Nov 6, 2012 5:38 PM

    Actually the democrats have taken it very seriously and are coming to the poles in huge numbers because they fear the Redskins rule will put Obama out of office. In this case the Redskins rule will help Obama by getting dems to the poles. It looks like another Obama landslide. Romney replied “What day is the election again?”

  38. fullbagg says: Nov 6, 2012 6:16 PM

    I am no longer allowed to critique. Shanny is my coach and the skins are my team.

    We have a QB, RB and PK though!!!

    Thats… Thats all I can say……

  39. phonecops says: Nov 6, 2012 6:57 PM

    Correlation does not mean causation.

    No matter what my lucky Packer shirt says.

  40. doylemcmuffin says: Nov 6, 2012 7:09 PM

    Looks like Romney is winning on this chat board. Very similar results will be found nationwide.

  41. whitecastleisafoodgroup says: Nov 6, 2012 10:18 PM

    For all the people who buy into this crap I am selling seats on my Ark that’s going to set sail early morning of 12/21/12. Kids and seniors sail free.

  42. ronaldmexico7 says: Nov 6, 2012 10:53 PM

    I need my Obama money and my Obama phone…

  43. ridingwithnohandlebars says: Nov 7, 2012 6:25 AM

    Can’t count on the Redskins for anything. :(

  44. theclaim says: Nov 12, 2012 7:39 PM

    I am certain the Redskin Rule is nothing more than a coincidence but it’s a since 1932 infallible til now coincidence and THAT is FACT

  45. theclaim says: Nov 12, 2012 7:41 PM

    phonecops says:
    Nov 6, 2012 6:57 PM
    Correlation does not mean causation.

    No matter what my lucky Packer shirt says.

     Well said!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!