Skip to main content

View Diary: Hillary soars over GOP hopefuls in Iowa poll as Christie's crash gets worse (262 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Sitting veeps never lose the nomination, but they (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    katesmom, Rikon Snow, Odysseus, mconvente

    don't win the Presidency.

    Since Martin Van Buren was elected in 1836, George H.W. Bush is the only sitting Vice President to be elected President.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 09:51:06 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Open seat races (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MadGeorgiaDem, codairem, mconvente

      tend to be competitive. Bush won. Gore "Won" if a true vote count were allowed. Nixon lost by just a hair.  

      •  Competitive maybe, but there's still just that (0+ / 0-)

        one VP -> Pres ascension.

        LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

        by dinotrac on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 10:03:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  the larger point here is that (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cocinero, ahumbleopinion, Odysseus

          VPs tend to be undeniable presidential nominees if they want it. HRC is destroying Biden, however and he seems to want the top job.  This just shows how strong a frontrunner she would be and how hard it would be for anyone to stop her. Could happen, probably won't.  And the fact that so few sitting VPS have actually won the presidency doesn't mean that they make  poor candidates. For example, anyone other than Gore probably would have run worse. Ditto Nixon in 60.

          •  George HW Bush (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            dinotrac, mconvente

            only won, because the American people wanted to give Ronald Reagan a third term, and couldn't.  Nobody really loved him, though he was, objectively, one of the most effective VP's we have ever had.

            Reagan was the most popular president since Roosevelt.  Bush got Reagan's third term.  In 1992, he had to run on his own merits.  He was so unloved in his own party, many republican conservatives deserted him for Ross Perot.  

            GHWB is the exception that proves the rule:  It's virtually impossible to be elected in the role of sitting VP.  You get all the bad of the previous administration projected on you, and none of the credit for the good.

            That said, if you believe Gore really won, then Nixon probably won also.  But, if he had, it would have been the equivalent of America giving him the war hero Eisenhower's third term.  In the end, Gore lost partly because even Democrats didn't want a Clinton third term.  Now, we're about to make that happen.  Yikes!

            •  I don't accept that Dems didn't want (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mconvente, k88dad, Shawn87

              a third WJC term. Polls at the time showed the general electorate would have re-elected Bill had he been eligible to run again.  If Dems didn't want a third "Clinton term" as it were, why did a heavyweight challenger like Bill Bradley fail to win a single primary?

            •  Last sentence made little sense (5+ / 0-)

              Gore made the mistake of running away from Bill Clinton instead of seeking out his help.  He lost because despite the fact that people really wanted to give Bill Clinton a third term, because he was tone deaf to that truth and didn't "run with it."    Of course there was his less media friendly personality, Nader constantly trumpeting that Gore is just another corporatist stooge and there was not a whiff of difference between the Democratic and Republican party, and so forth, but Gore's failure to understand how immensely popular Bill Clinton was at the time (and hitch his wagon right on that) was probably the largest issue.  

              •  People might have had some Clinton fatigue, but (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Dr Swig Mcjigger

                Gore really ran a bad campaign.  He could have run on Clinton success without being Clinton.  Wouldn't surprise me it that's what the country really wanted anyway: all the light and none of the shadows.

                LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

                by dinotrac on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 10:46:37 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Yup. They loved them some Gipper. (0+ / 0-)

              Didn't hurt that the Democratic Party Cigar chompers were so afraid of Jesse Jackson that they laid the way clear for a less-than-inspiring Michael DuKakis.

              I don't believe that Gore won.
              There is no hard evidence to support it.
              I believe that the race was effectively a tie, but with a big asterisk:
              the networks called the state for Gore while the panhandle was still voting.  That would have generated more Bush votes and taking the state to "nearly" a tie.

              Nixon is the stuff of legend and we'll never know what happened there, but that race was also effectively a tie.

              LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

              by dinotrac on Thu Mar 13, 2014 at 10:45:12 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Wow. I never would have guessed that. (0+ / 0-)

      Thank you for the information.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (157)
  • Community (73)
  • Elections (44)
  • Environment (43)
  • Bernie Sanders (42)
  • 2016 (41)
  • Hillary Clinton (35)
  • Spam (34)
  • Culture (34)
  • Republicans (33)
  • Media (32)
  • Climate Change (32)
  • Civil Rights (28)
  • Labor (27)
  • Education (24)
  • Science (24)
  • Congress (24)
  • Law (23)
  • Barack Obama (22)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site