Best candidate losing party could nominate since 1948 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 04:43:54 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)
  Best candidate losing party could nominate since 1948 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Best candidate losing party could nominate since 1948  (Read 3979 times)
VPH
vivaportugalhabs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,702
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -0.17

« on: May 24, 2015, 10:52:05 PM »

1948: Earl Warren-Might have squeaked a win off against Truman with a stronger performance during the campaign than Dewey put up.
1952: Estes Kefauver-Still would have lost, but by less
1956: Estes Kefauver-Same as above
1960: Nelson Rockefeller-Could have eked out a win through a few states (NJ,DE,IL)
1964: Nelson Rockefeller-Anybody could do better than Goldwater
1968: Robert F. Kennedy (Not sure if this counts or not, but yeah...)-Not only would he benefit from the name, but RFK was a great orator and a good politician. Could have beat Nixon in IL, OH, etc
1972: Harold Hughes-'72 was going to be tough for Dems either way. Hughes kinda straddled liberalism and moderation in a way that probably would have helped him. Had the candidate been Scoop Jackson or Hubert Humphrey, we might have seen a left wing insurgency.
1976: Ronald Reagan-Reagan and Carter would have made for a heck of a battle. It would be close.
1980: Ted Kennedy-I think Kennedy could have possibly beat Reagan if everything went right, but for sure he would have held him to a closer margin. Ted would win NY, MA, PA, ME, WI, MI, and some more states if he did well.
1984: Gary Hart-Beating Reagan would have been an uphill battle, and I'm honestly not sure how well Hart would have done but it would have been better than Mondale. He was definitely more charismatic.
1988: Mario Cuomo-I think Dukakis' wishy washy stances really hurt him. Cuomo was a brilliant guy with a lot of appeal. I could see a path to victory for Cuomo.
1992: George HW Bush-I don't see any other viable option here. The incumbent wasn't a particularly bad candidate; he just got screwed by Perot.
1996: Colin Powell-Powell was the uber-candidate. Great crossover appeal, awesome record, popular, etc. I could see Powell beating Clinton.
2000: Al Gore-I don't think Democrats had much of a candidate in 2000 to turn to aside from the VP. Bradley sure as heck couldn't have done better.
2004: Wes Clark-Clark's solid military background and blue collar Southern roots would beat out Kerry's flip flopping and his 'blue-blooded New Englander' perception. I think Clark could have given Bush a run for his money, and if he played his cards right in terms of VP pick and campaigning, he could have defeated Bush.
2008: John McCain-I think Obama has 2008 in the bag no matter who the candidate is. McCain was experienced and probably as close as the GOP was going to get to fielding a good candidate that year. Yeesh, imagine Romney amidst the economic collapse...
2012: Jon Huntsman-Huntsman would NEVER have made it through the primary, but he would be a tough opponent for Obama. His experience and moderate track record would serve him well with the public, and I could see him beating Obama in some of the key swing states like Colorado, Florida, Ohio, Nevada, and Iowa.
Logged
VPH
vivaportugalhabs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,702
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -0.17

« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2016, 01:02:24 PM »

In hindsight, I would have said John Edwards in 2004.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.024 seconds with 12 queries.