If Mondale hadn't run in 1984

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Could he have gotten the nomination in 1988? I mean, people say 84 was his only chance, but it's not like Dukakis was a more electrifying candidate.

[RodPresident]

Mondale runs in 1982 election to Governor of Minnesota and is kept on spotlight. Then he goes to run in 1988 as the most experient candidate. He puts Tim Wirth as Vice Presidential nominee.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Mondale runs in 1982 election to Governor of Minnesota and is kept on spotlight. Then he goes to run in 1988 as the most experient candidate. He puts Tim Wirth as Vice Presidential nominee.

Probably still doesn't win. Dukakis was supposed to run a non-ideological, technocratic, post-liberal type of campaign and was trounced thanks to the Bush team's efforts. While Mondale might be able to keep some parts of the old labor/populist framework together, I still think he ain't winning. I think the ideal would be a sandal-free Gary Hart.

[AelroseB]

By 1988, the national American electorate was still largely siding with the economic conservatism of the Reagan-era, and as Mondale's base largely centered around labor, racial minorities, and the generally economically-struggling, he might have pulled off a slightly better result than Michael Dukakis - bringing out said groups with some fervor - but still lost by several hundred EVs.  A John Glenn or Donna Rice-less Gary Hart pick as VP might have increased his results some, but overall, he represented policies that the majority, if only a small one, disliked/was tired with at that time.  Overall, an unavoidable loss for Democrats that year on a Mondale ticket. 

[TX Conservative Dem]

Reagan was still going to win reelection regardless who the Dems nominated in 1984.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Reagan was still going to win reelection regardless who the Dems nominated in 1984.

Agreed. All I was asking was whether Mondale had a chance to win the Democratic nomination in 1988 if he hadn't run in 84.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Yeah, I think he'd get the nomination in '88. The odds are, the Democrats put up Jesse Jackson as the sacrificial lamb against Reagan. They get to have a historic first and drive up black turnout a lot to help them minimize their losses in other races, but Reagan still probably wins 50 states.

Then Mondale is able to win the nomination in '88. He probably loses, but the odds are he wins more states than Dukakis.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

This thread has nothing to do with the outcome of 1984.

[DINGO Joe]

This thread has nothing to do with the outcome of 1984.

Without Mondale, Hart  would likely have won the nomination in 1984.  It probably does  depend on how Hart did in 1984 vs Reagan.  If he had a decent showing, then he likely could have fended off Mondale in 1988, unless, as Cathcon said, Hart chose to wear sandals.  Americans clearly weren't ready for a sandal wearing President in 1988.

[MATTROSE94]

Yeah, I think he'd get the nomination in '88. The odds are, the Democrats put up Jesse Jackson as the sacrificial lamb against Reagan. They get to have a historic first and drive up black turnout a lot to help them minimize their losses in other races, but Reagan still probably wins 50 states.

Then Mondale is able to win the nomination in '88. He probably loses, but the odds are he wins more states than Dukakis.

It is also possible that either Gary Hart or Ernest Hollings would have won the Democratic nomination in 1984. Hart would have probably done better than Mondale and would have picked up New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Vermont, Maryland, Iowa, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon and Michigan in addition to Minnesota. Hollings, on the other hand, would have likely done slightly worse than Mondale, probably losing Minnesota and only carrying West Virginia by a few thousand votes. In addition, Hollings might have done a few points worse in DC than Mondale due to his past reputation as a segregationist during his term as governor of South Carolina and during his early Senate career.