Could Gary Hart have at least made the '84 summer/fall race competitive?

[sg0508]

That being said, I think we can all agree that in the 80s, the Democrats had very little regional base.

1) They weren't strong enough yet in the northeast, Midwest or the Pacific rim.
2) The suburbs were still dominated by Republicans
3) The economy, the Olympics and "Good Morning America" gave Reagan/Bush a tremendous amount of momentum.

That being said, Hart was more viable than Mondale with young voters and likely with women (I would think?).  He also came across as the fresher, younger, more vibrant and better looking Democrat rather than the stale, "Old Democrat" in Mondale, which was near dead and buried by the mid 80s.  Of course, the Democrats didn't figure that out in '88 either, but that's another story.

Could he have at least made the '84 race somewhat competitive in the general? I don't know that he would have won many more states than MN and maybe a few more in the northeast, but it's an interesting thing to ponder.

[White Trash]

Probably could've taken (in addition to Minnesota) the Democratic strongholds in New England like Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Probably Maryland and West Virginia too. I think Hart taking Colorado would've been far more difficult. He could've maybe taken New Mexico, but by and large the West was in Reagan's pocket.

[Podgy the Bear]

For a few weeks in the early part of 1984, Hart was surging--especially after winning New Hampshire.  The "yuppies" came out of the Gary Hart campaign where he had some hold of the youth vote.   And on Super Tuesday that year, he took 7 out of 9 primaries--closing out the primary schedule with some big wins, especially in California.

He may have done somewhat better than Mondale in 1984--but Reagan was simply too strong that year.  1988 could have been a different story.  Hart is really one of the "what ifs" in American politics.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Competitive as to actually threathen Reagan?

No. Me might not even outperform Mondale. Hart was a bit of empty suit. If Reagan was able to humiliate Mondale as a political dinosaur, he would have easily destroy Hart as a shallow amateur.

[Blair]

Competitive as to actually threathen Reagan?

No. Me might not even outperform Mondale. Hart was a bit of empty suit. If Reagan was able to humiliate Mondale as a political dinosaur, he would have easily destroy Hart as a shallow amateur.

The irony is that Mondale was both an out of date New Dealer, whilst also being 'youthful and inexperienced' in the words of Gipper.

If Mondale ( a rather average pol) could take apart Hart with three words (Where's the Beef) it doesn't say much for Harts skill

[IceSpear]

If Mondale ( a rather average pol) could take apart Hart with three words (Where's the Beef) it doesn't say much for Harts skill

This. Also, Hart this year thought Martin O'Malley was his ideological soulmate and would succeed where he failed. That tells you a lot about his political acumen.

Reagan cracks 60 and Hart only carries DC.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

If Mondale ( a rather average pol) could take apart Hart with three words (Where's the Beef) it doesn't say much for Harts skill

This. Also, Hart this year thought Martin O'Malley was his ideological soulmate and would succeed where he failed. That tells you a lot about his political acumen.

I can't even process this information.

[Nym90]

Competitive as to actually threathen Reagan?

No. Me might not even outperform Mondale. Hart was a bit of empty suit. If Reagan was able to humiliate Mondale as a political dinosaur, he would have easily destroy Hart as a shallow amateur.

The irony is that Mondale was both an out of date New Dealer, whilst also being 'youthful and inexperienced' in the words of Gipper.

If Mondale ( a rather average pol) could take apart Hart with three words (Where's the Beef) it doesn't say much for Harts skill

The "youthful and inexperienced" line was a joke, given that Mondale was clearly neither.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Competitive as to actually threathen Reagan?

No. Me might not even outperform Mondale. Hart was a bit of empty suit. If Reagan was able to humiliate Mondale as a political dinosaur, he would have easily destroy Hart as a shallow amateur.

The irony is that Mondale was both an out of date New Dealer, whilst also being 'youthful and inexperienced' in the words of Gipper.

If Mondale ( a rather average pol) could take apart Hart with three words (Where's the Beef) it doesn't say much for Harts skill

The "youthful and inexperienced" line was a joke, given that Mondale was clearly neither.

But it did work, didn't it?

If Mondale was able to own Hart with "where's the beef?", imagine what would Reagan do.

[sg0508]

I do agree with you in that Hart not winning the '84 primary set him up nicely for a chance in '88. Of course, his personal issues blew that chance up.  I agree that he will be a "what if/if only" politician in American history.

Reagan losing the primary to Ford in '76 set him up nicely for '80 and there was no guarantee that he would have beaten Carter in '76.

[Bigby]

If Mondale ( a rather average pol) could take apart Hart with three words (Where's the Beef) it doesn't say much for Harts skill

This. Also, Hart this year thought Martin O'Malley was his ideological soulmate and would succeed where he failed. That tells you a lot about his political acumen.

Reagan cracks 60 and Hart only carries DC.

Would the line be "Well, D.C. would have been nice..." when they ask Reagan what he wanted for Christmas?

[136or142]

Gary Hart was far from a lightweight.  He was a leading thinker on nuclear issues and foreign policy in general, and he was one of the early Democrats fighting against old-line liberalism that ultimately led to Bill Clinton (though Gary Hart positioned himself more as a 'technocrat' or, in the parlance of the day 'an Atari Democrat' than as the 'centrist' that Bill Clinton more or less ran on and governed as.)

Gary Hart is also rightly credited for helping George McGovern win the Democratic nomination in 1972 and Hart's own insurgent campaign against Walter Mondale is at least as relatively successful as Bernie Sanders' insurgent campaign this time around will be as while Sanders was pretty much the only alternative to Hillary Rodham Clinton, Gary Hart had to overcome a number of other top contenders challenging Mondale for the Democratic nomination including John Glenn.  

I'm also not sure that the 'where's the beef' advertisement ended Gary Hart's candidacy as has been stated above, as much as his lack of organization in the later primary states and his inability to raise enough funding to compete with Mondale did.

Gary Hart would have lost to Ronald Reagan because of the things written above, but also because Hart was and is simply a very strange person, but the view at the time that I agree with is that he likely would have ended up getting 43-45% of the vote, as opposed to the 41% that Mondale received.

[Nym90]

Competitive as to actually threathen Reagan?

No. Me might not even outperform Mondale. Hart was a bit of empty suit. If Reagan was able to humiliate Mondale as a political dinosaur, he would have easily destroy Hart as a shallow amateur.

The irony is that Mondale was both an out of date New Dealer, whilst also being 'youthful and inexperienced' in the words of Gipper.

If Mondale ( a rather average pol) could take apart Hart with three words (Where's the Beef) it doesn't say much for Harts skill

The "youthful and inexperienced" line was a joke, given that Mondale was clearly neither.

But it did work, didn't it?

If Mondale was able to own Hart with "where's the beef?", imagine what would Reagan do.

Yes, because it deflected the age issue away from Reagan, but not as an attack on Mondale. It was a classic example of Reagan's charm getting him off the hook and enabling him to not answer honestly about an important issue, which he was a master of.

[Nym90]

Regarding Hart, he probably would have done a little better than Mondale, but not much. He almost certainly would have indeed been attacked by Reagan as being too slick, inexperienced, and not up to the job. Kind of like John Edwards 20 years before his time (including the philandering).

Now in 1988 on the other hand, if no one had ever heard of Donna Rice, most likely Hart beats George HW Bush or at least makes it very close.

[sg0508]

It's off-topic, but many forget that Hart almost got ousted from the Senate in the '80 GOP landslide.  While '86 was a very strong Democratic year, there's no guarantee he would have won his seat for a third term, especially since most knew he was going for the presidency again in '88.

[Nym90]

It's off-topic, but many forget that Hart almost got ousted from the Senate in the '80 GOP landslide.  While '86 was a very strong Democratic year, there's no guarantee he would have won his seat for a third term, especially since most knew he was going for the presidency again in '88.

True, but the fact that he survived in a year when so many other Dem Senators lost (nine (!) Dem incumbents went down to defeat that year in the general, along with three more in the primaries) despite Reagan winning heavily in Colorado speaks to his political acumen moreso than it speaks against it.

[DS0816]

No.