Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 03, 2014, 02:04:53 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  Candidates who suffered by failing to excite the "base"
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Candidates who suffered by failing to excite the "base"  (Read 1693 times)
Carlos Danger
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8404
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« on: June 01, 2012, 12:46:02 pm »
Ignore

Examples I can think of are Lewis Cass, Horace Greeley, Benjamin Harrison (1892), Alton Parker, William Howard Taft (1912), John Davis, Alf Landon, Wendell Willkie, Hubert Humphrey, and George H.W. Bush (1992).  All of these are debatable (Davis, Landon, and Willkie are the most obvious), several were harmed by third party candidates, and most occured during large shifts in the composition of their party's "base," where one faction was directly opposed to the other.  H.W. is also the only recent one.  Is pissing off the "base" overrated?
Logged

A.G. Snowstalker
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17338
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -8.45, S: -4.26

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2012, 02:06:31 pm »
Ignore

McCain?
Logged

Carlos Danger
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8404
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 01, 2012, 02:07:39 pm »
Ignore

McCain?

It's possible, but conventional wisdom is that Palin counteracted that.
Logged

Scott
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18845
United States
View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2012, 02:27:58 pm »
Ignore

McCain?

It's possible, but conventional wisdom is that Palin counteracted that.

I think Palin rallied the base, but she turned out to be a net-negative because independents and moderates were turned off by her.
Logged
Carlos Danger
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8404
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2012, 02:45:22 pm »
Ignore

McCain?

It's possible, but conventional wisdom is that Palin counteracted that.

I think Palin rallied the base, but she turned out to be a net-negative because independents and moderates were turned off by her.

Well yes, but this isn't what the thread is about.

I'd personally say that the only election that was very likely lost due to avoidable irritation of the base was 1940.
Logged

Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30640
France


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2012, 03:43:41 am »
Ignore

McCain?

Nah. "NObama" was a sufficient reason to motivate the GOP base at that time.
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
A.G. Snowstalker
Snowstalker
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17338
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -8.45, S: -4.26

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2012, 10:37:22 pm »
Ignore

You could say Al Smith, given that he certainly didn't appeal to the Democratic base (southern whites), and only won the Deep South "yellow dog" states.
Logged

Carlos Danger
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8404
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 04, 2012, 10:42:10 pm »
Ignore

You could say Al Smith, given that he certainly didn't appeal to the Democratic base (southern whites), and only won the Deep South "yellow dog" states.

Not really, since he was incredibly exciting to the larger component of the Democratic base (Catholics and immigrants).  Saying Al Smith didn't excite the base would be like saying George McGovern and Barry Goldwater didn't because they alienated labor and WASPs.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2012, 10:45:03 pm by red's wet dream »Logged

Senator bore
bore
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2426
United Kingdom


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 05, 2012, 05:59:39 am »
Ignore

It depends how you define the base, because due to the nature of the US most candidates alienate and excite different sections of the base.
Logged
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11312
Russian Federation


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 05, 2012, 12:15:41 pm »
Ignore

McCain?

It's possible, but conventional wisdom is that Palin counteracted that.

I think Palin rallied the base, but she turned out to be a net-negative because independents and moderates were turned off by her.

Well yes, but this isn't what the thread is about.

I'd personally say that the only election that was very likely lost due to avoidable irritation of the base was 1940.
Who do you consider the base to be for 1940?  Is there another candidate who could have done better?
Logged

Carlos Danger
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8404
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 05, 2012, 01:01:11 pm »
Ignore

McCain?

It's possible, but conventional wisdom is that Palin counteracted that.

I think Palin rallied the base, but she turned out to be a net-negative because independents and moderates were turned off by her.

Well yes, but this isn't what the thread is about.

I'd personally say that the only election that was very likely lost due to avoidable irritation of the base was 1940.
Who do you consider the base to be for 1940?  Is there another candidate who could have done better?

The two front-runners for the nomination, Robert Taft and Thomas Dewey (then an isolationist) would've both done far better than Willkie.  The base were the isolationist Midwestern conservatives.  In 1940, FDR had completely worn out his welcome with the 1938 recession, the court-packing attempt, running for an unprecedented third term, and trying to involve the US in World War II.  He was quite unpopular at the start of the campaign.  It was looking like isolationist Catholics would break strongly to the Republicans (they actually *did,* just not as strongly as they might've).  Nominating Willkie, a foreign policy interventionist who wasn't willing to strongly criticize Roosevelt's policies and who played into the Democrats' populist narrative of the Republicans being controlled by rich people (he being a wealthy utility executive), the GOP successfully and spectacularly threw an election that should've been theirs for the taking.
Logged

They call me PR
Progressive Realist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5478
United States


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 05, 2012, 04:05:55 pm »
Ignore

You could say Al Smith, given that he certainly didn't appeal to the Democratic base (southern whites), and only won the Deep South "yellow dog" states.

Not really, since he was incredibly exciting to the larger component of the Democratic base (Catholics and immigrants).  Saying Al Smith didn't excite the base would be like saying George McGovern and Barry Goldwater didn't because they alienated labor and WASPs.

Barry Goldwater alienated WASPs? What do you think Orange County was at the time? Tongue
Logged
Carlos Danger
wormyguy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8404
Liechtenstein


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2012, 04:29:48 pm »
Ignore

You could say Al Smith, given that he certainly didn't appeal to the Democratic base (southern whites), and only won the Deep South "yellow dog" states.

Not really, since he was incredibly exciting to the larger component of the Democratic base (Catholics and immigrants).  Saying Al Smith didn't excite the base would be like saying George McGovern and Barry Goldwater didn't because they alienated labor and WASPs.

Barry Goldwater alienated WASPs? What do you think Orange County was at the time? Tongue

Northeastern WASPs obviously.
Logged

Vermin Supreme
Henry Clay
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 470


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 06, 2012, 02:05:33 pm »
Ignore

Jimmy Carter 1980 and Al Gore 2000.
Logged

hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 08, 2012, 05:10:33 pm »
Ignore

H.W. Bush 1992, Dole 1996, Kerry 2004 and McCain 2008.
Logged
hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: June 08, 2012, 05:12:52 pm »
Ignore

Jimmy Carter 1980 and Al Gore 2000.
No I think the Dem Base liked Gore at the time. I think that was before the Dems moved really to the left on economic issues when Pelosi became House Minority Leader in 2003.
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6307
United States


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: June 10, 2012, 03:52:26 pm »
Ignore

Jimmy Carter 1980 and Al Gore 2000.
No I think the Dem Base liked Gore at the time. I think that was before the Dems moved really to the left on economic issues when Pelosi became House Minority Leader in 2003.

Gore had serious problems with large parts of the base in 2000, as illustrated by how well Nader did in college towns, on the West Coast, and in the Upper Midwest. It was almost certainly enough to swing a very close election, and it forced Gore to spend time and resources in states that should have been safe. Remember that back then Gore was seen as a much more moderate, centrist figure.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2012, 08:10:02 pm by Stranger in a strange land »Logged

hopper
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1424


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 12, 2012, 06:03:22 pm »
Ignore

Jimmy Carter 1980 and Al Gore 2000.
No I think the Dem Base liked Gore at the time. I think that was before the Dems moved really to the left on economic issues when Pelosi became House Minority Leader in 2003.

Gore had serious problems with large parts of the base in 2000, as illustrated by how well Nader did in college towns, on the West Coast, and in the Upper Midwest. It was almost certainly enough to swing a very close election, and it forced Gore to spend time and resources in states that should have been safe. Remember that back then Gore was seen as a much more moderate, centrist figure.
Yeah but Gore lost "centrist" political states though like Arkansas(back when it was competitive for the D's), Florida, Ohio, and West Virginia(also competitive for the D's back then.) Ok I'll give he lost Colorado another "centrist" state but it did have a big university town in "Boulder" like you said.
Logged
IDS Emperor Maxwell
mah519
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12139
Germany


Political Matrix
E: 6.52, S: -7.57

P

View Profile
« Reply #18 on: June 13, 2012, 06:39:57 pm »
Ignore

Mitt Romney or Barack Obama
Logged

Boot out the Bums! Vote for Dorman for Governor!

Gravis Marketing
brittain33
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12795


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: June 20, 2012, 02:21:48 pm »
Ignore

The theme of 2000 election campaign coverage was Gore's problem with the base, but then he won on Election Day, surprising everyone, on high Dem turnout and GOTV.
Logged
BritishDixie
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 294
United Kingdom


View Profile WWW
« Reply #20 on: June 25, 2012, 06:51:16 am »
Ignore

Bush Sr suffered of course in retrospect, with his "no new taxes pledge"..........But it seemed like a good idea at the time.
Logged

Economic score: +6.58
Social score: +5.04
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1637
United States


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2012, 01:38:14 pm »
Ignore

I would think that a political scientist could answer the "Is it better to appeal to the center or the base?" question by looking at Senate or Gubernatorial elections.

Presidential elections are just too small a sample set.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines