Why do experienced Senators lose presidential elections?

[Mister Mets]

Historically, there haven't been a lot of people who went directly from the Senate to the Presidency. Harding had been in the office for six years, Kennedy for eight and Obama for four.

There have been quite a few long-time Senators who won their party’s nomination and lost the presidential election, including Barry Goldwater in 1964 (he had then served twelve years in the Senate), George McGovern in 1972 (he had then then served ten years in the Senate), Bob Dole in 1996 (he had then served 27 years in the Senate), John Kerry in 2004 (he had then served twenty years in the Senate) and John McCain in 2008 (he had then served 22 years in the Senate). So, are longer serving Senators at a disadvantage somehow in the presidential election? Is something else at play? Or is it just a coincidence?

It is worth noting that five of these Senators ran against incumbent Presidents, who tend to be at an advantage in general elections. It could be that political parties are simply more likely to nominate these candidates in difficult cycles.

I wonder if when a party has a chance at winning back the White House, the primary voters want change, which isn’t embodied by someone who has been in the Senate for a long time. It can be represented by a younger Senator (Barack Obama in 2008, JFK in 1960), an obscure Governor (Jimmy Carter in 1976, Bill Clinton in 1992), a notable Governor (Ronald Reagan in 1980, Mike Dukakis in 1988, George W Bush in 2000) or a national figure (Eisenhower in 1952, Richard Nixon in 1968.)

This is something for Gilibrand, Rand Paul, Rubio and Ayotte to consider as the invisible primary begins.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Opponents can use the votes of long serving senator against them. John Kerry voted for Iraq. McCain voted "with Bush 90% of the time". Dole was old and boring. They were all seen as Washington Insiders running against new faces and people associated with Change. Their records were harder to defend than Carter, Clinton, Kennedy, and Obama.

[Asian Nazi]

They make for nice sacrificial lambs.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Clinton '96 is right... a long history in the Senate equals a record and paper trail..

Mind you, while being young, Kennedy had been in congress for 14 years when he became president...

[Stranger in a strange land]

A long career in the Senate also leads to certain bad habits such as droning oratory and obsolete rhetorical styles. This might be fine in the Senate, where most work is done behind the scenes, but it just looks bad on the campaign trail.

[pbrower2a]

Governors have records as administrators. Some Governorships are good analogues to the Presidency in that a Governor is in charge of a huge political entity with much diversity. Of course the States are not divided as federal entities, so that is an imperfect analogy.

Governors might have to deal with emergencies -- like earthquakes, floods, and storms. Such can show extreme competence (Christie, 2012?) or incompetence (Blanco, 2005?) in a Governor. Governors can shake things up, but if they shake things up the wrong way (Scott, Snyder) they can get into big trouble and wreck whatever image they came in with.

...It could be that long-term Senators become increasingly un-Presidential as they get accustomed to the Senate. Kennedy and Obama were short-time US Senators.  One might have thought that someone with long and varied service in government (George Voinovich was Mayor of Cleveland, Governor of Ohio, and a US Senator) would be ideal because one would have the trifecta of high public service. But every politician at a certain level has some individuality, and it could be that some pols are wrong for the time. No President had a longer and more diverse record of public service than did James Buchanan.

[Mister Mets]

They make for nice sacrificial lambs.

That's also possible.

In most cycles, experienced Senators will run for President.

But it could be that the most talented members of the party stay out of primaries if their party isn't favored to win the General Election. Hillary Clinton opted not to run in 2004. Rubio and Christie stayed out in 2012.

Clinton '96 is right... a long history in the Senate equals a record and paper trail..

Mind you, while being young, Kennedy had been in congress for 14 years when he became president...

Illness took him out of Congress for a while, though.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Because like byrd, and unlike begich and obama they give flibuster speeches and become wooden and stiff.