Was the winner of each election the more heavyweight or lightweight candidate?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 18, 2024, 04:59:30 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Was the winner of each election the more heavyweight or lightweight candidate?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Was the winner of each election the more heavyweight or lightweight candidate?  (Read 865 times)
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 10, 2010, 07:52:56 PM »

1948 - HW
1952 - HW
1956 - HW
1960 - LW
1964 - HW
1968 - HW
1972 - HW
1976 - LW
1980 - LW
1984 - HW
1988 - HW
1992 - LW
1996 - LW
2000 - LW
2004 - Hmmmm....HW
2008 - LW
Logged
feeblepizza
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,910
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.45, S: -0.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2010, 08:47:29 PM »

1948 - HW
1952 - HW
1956 - HW
1960 - LW
1964 - HW
1968 - HW
1972 - HW
1976 - LW
1980 - LW
1984 - HW
1988 - HW
1992 - LW
1996 - LW
2000 - LW
2004 - Hmmmm....HW
2008 - LW


I agree entirely.
Logged
"'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"
DarthNader
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 483


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2010, 08:50:31 PM »

Is the assumption here that the more experienced candidate is the more HW candidate? Because even in '80,  Reagan was more of a HW than Carter, and Clinton was at least as HW as his two opponents.
Logged
feeblepizza
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,910
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.45, S: -0.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 10, 2010, 08:59:15 PM »

Is the assumption here that the more experienced candidate is the more HW candidate? Because even in '80,  Reagan was more of a HW than Carter, and Clinton was at least as HW as his two opponents.

1980 is debate able, and Ross Perot was definitely a LW, but between Bush, Sr. and Clinton....

Bush -
Two years as a U.S. Congressman
Two years as the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations
One year as Chairman of the RNC
One year as the U.S. Ambassador to China
One year as the Director of the CIA
Two years as the Director of the CFR
Eight years as Vice-President of the United States
Four years as President of the United States

Clinton -
Two years as the Arkansas State Attorney General
Eleven years (off and on) as Governor of a state with a population of less than 1,000,000 people

I think that Bush, Sr. is a HW.
Logged
"'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"
DarthNader
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 483


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 10, 2010, 09:06:19 PM »
« Edited: October 10, 2010, 09:13:30 PM by DarthNader »

That's political experience. You can be politically experienced and not really be a heavyweight. Dennis Kucinich would have been a more experienced candidate than Bush II, but I'm not sure he's more of a heavyweight. In terms of political skills and charisma, Reagan & Clinton (especially by '96) were heavyweights, and Carter & Bush I were lightweights.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,068
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2010, 12:24:39 PM »

What do exactly heavyweight and lightweight mean ?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.029 seconds with 12 queries.