Could Mondale have done better with a different campaign?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 10:03:52 PM
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)
  Could Mondale have done better with a different campaign?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Could he?
#1
Yes, he could have lost by closer to 10% than 20%
 
#2
No, it was destined to be a landslide
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 38

Author Topic: Could Mondale have done better with a different campaign?  (Read 2074 times)
Unironic Merrick Garland Stan
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,605
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 11, 2017, 04:46:08 PM »

Sure, Reagan was always going to win, but I feel like Mondale could have done much better. First of all, from what I've read, they held back on negativity towards Reagan because of his personal favorables. This seems idiotic, if your opponent is popular you should go all the more negative, since driving their numbers down should be your priority. Also, it seems from the ads he emphasized the deficit above all else, something most voters don't completely understand, yet alone care about. The second biggest issue was arms control, another loser for the Democrats in this period in time. I feel like he could have done a lot better by emphasizing jobs and healthcare.
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,486
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2017, 06:16:16 PM »

Sure, he could have lost by 10-12 and held a bunch more states had he been more charismatic and moderate on economics, but he was never going to win or even do as well as Dukakis.
Logged
Tutankhuman Bakari Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,456
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2017, 06:47:42 PM »

What sunk Mondale as well as his ineffectual debate performance was the fact that Geraldine Ferraro's husband's ethics got the best of the campaign.  Mondale would had to dump Ferraro and thus he would have angered women voters and they got him through the primaries.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,038
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2017, 01:07:45 AM »

Would've been easy, just pick someone besides Ferraro.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,255


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2017, 01:16:56 AM »

Well certainly , he could have done better then he did(I mean he only barely won one state, and electorally did worse then McGovern). The best he can do in my opinion though is this:



Logged
SingingAnalyst
mathstatman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2017, 11:30:24 AM »
« Edited: June 15, 2017, 11:36:11 AM by mathstatman »

I voted No. Perhaps under a best case scenario (voters were genuinely worried about Reagan's "the bombing starts in 5 minutes" quip; Mondale had shot something back after Reagan's "I will not exploit... my opponent's youth and inexperience" line to neutralize its effect) Mondale could have reached 43% and picked up MA, RI, and maybe MD.

Mondale still would have lost the EV, 498-40.

Reagan had several things in his favor:

1. The economy, while not great, was starting to recover.

2. Voters had just dumped two incumbent Presidents in a row; all Reagan had to do was show up and be halfway decent, and he'd be re-elected. Americans were not going to have their 5th president in a bit more than a decade (going back to Aug. 8, 1974).

3. Mondale's issues simply did not resonate with the voters of 1984. Anti-discrimination protection for gays and lesbians? Only 23% knew someone gay or lesbian in 1984 (Gallup) and religious fundamentalism-based anti-gay sentiment was running high. Raise taxes? Voters thought taxes were already too high, particularly on the working and middle class, as Prop 13 in CA showed on June 6, 1978. The deficit? A complicated issue voters didn't really care about. A woman VP? Pandering. "I don't want them [religious fundamentalists like Jerry Falwell] to have any influence whatsoever" as Mondale said to a group of Jewish women in Brooklyn shortly before the election? Jews (67-32 Mondale) constituted 3% of the 1984 electorate; white born-again Christians (80-20 Reagan): 15%.

I see no way Mondale could have made it close.
Logged
SingingAnalyst
mathstatman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2017, 11:58:13 AM »

Sure, Reagan was always going to win, but I feel like Mondale could have done much better. First of all, from what I've read, they held back on negativity towards Reagan because of his personal favorables. This seems idiotic, if your opponent is popular you should go all the more negative, since driving their numbers down should be your priority. Also, it seems from the ads he emphasized the deficit above all else, something most voters don't completely understand, yet alone care about. The second biggest issue was arms control, another loser for the Democrats in this period in time. I feel like he could have done a lot better by emphasizing jobs and healthcare.
I'd be interested to know the source, and if it's true. Though I was only 18 (as of Sept.) I remember Mondale (and other Dems) throwing everything including the kitchen sink at Reagan: he was inattentive (Beirut Oct. 23, 1983) and possibly too old; he didn't care about the poor; he was a militarist; he was out of touch on issues like abortion. Then again, maybe I just got that impression because I was living in Cambridge, MA (which voted Mondale 76.2% - 23.4%) at the time.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, Mondale opposed the death penalty, favored by 70%+ of Americans. That couldn't have helped him.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,995
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 15, 2017, 03:02:40 PM »

He obviously should have targeted rich, White suburbanites.
Logged
SingingAnalyst
mathstatman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 15, 2017, 03:15:06 PM »

He obviously should have targeted rich, White suburbanites.
I remember walking down the street in the wealthy suburb of Brookline, MA (Mondale 69.2%-30.7%) and seeing a small foreign car (which was odd enough to me as a kid from Macomb County, MI, where all the cars were American) with a bumper sticker "Reagan for the rich; Mondale for the rest".
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,433
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 15, 2017, 06:11:57 PM »
« Edited: June 15, 2017, 06:13:34 PM by Mister Mets »

If he had Lloyd Bentsen or Mike Dukakis as a running mate, he wouldn't have done as poorly.

The problem with Ferraro is it made Democrats seem more interested in diversity than qualifications.
Logged
Obama-Biden Democrat
Zyzz
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2017, 07:19:31 PM »

He obviously should have targeted rich, White suburbanites.
I remember walking down the street in the wealthy suburb of Brookline, MA (Mondale 69.2%-30.7%) and seeing a small foreign car (which was odd enough to me as a kid from Macomb County, MI, where all the cars were American) with a bumper sticker "Reagan for the rich; Mondale for the rest".

Not everyone can be born handsome and rich, for those who aren't we have the Democratic party.

- Zell Miller
Logged
NOVA Green
Oregon Progressive
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,410
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 16, 2017, 09:47:08 PM »

Well certainly , he could have done better then he did(I mean he only barely won one state, and electorally did worse then McGovern). The best he can do in my opinion though is this:





This actually looks like a fairly realistic "best case" scenario for Mondale, maybe throw in a few random states like New York, West Virginia, Washington, Hawaii into the mix....

The problem with Mondale was that only did he somehow seem to appear to be older than Reagan in terms of optics, but additionally he was widely seen as an establishment Democratic candidate, as the former Veep of unpopular President Jimmy Carter (Who only won six states in 1980) running against an extremely charismatic and personally popular Ronald Reagan.

Although Reagan's personal favs were high in '84, many of his economic and foreign policy platforms were not....

Certainly we would not expect Mondale to perform well in the "Deep South", compared to Carter in '80, however it appears that in '84 Reagan was able to bag a huge chunk of John Anderson '80s voters, which sealed his fate in the Suburbs of Northern States.

Now, back in the days when TV campaign commercials were much more influential than today, this classic Reagan '84 ad does a compare & contrasts, but with an upbeat and optimistic theme...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU-IBF8nwSY

The Democratic establishment selection of Mondale as their candidate in '84 was an awful choice that reminded voters of the economic pains of the late '70s ("Stagflation") rather than hitting Reagan on the economic austerity regime that caused widespread recession and poverty throughout our great country.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,255


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 17, 2017, 12:28:59 AM »

Well certainly , he could have done better then he did(I mean he only barely won one state, and electorally did worse then McGovern). The best he can do in my opinion though is this:





This actually looks like a fairly realistic "best case" scenario for Mondale, maybe throw in a few random states like New York, West Virginia, Washington, Hawaii into the mix....

The problem with Mondale was that only did he somehow seem to appear to be older than Reagan in terms of optics, but additionally he was widely seen as an establishment Democratic candidate, as the former Veep of unpopular President Jimmy Carter (Who only won six states in 1980) running against an extremely charismatic and personally popular Ronald Reagan.

Although Reagan's personal favs were high in '84, many of his economic and foreign policy platforms were not....

Certainly we would not expect Mondale to perform well in the "Deep South", compared to Carter in '80, however it appears that in '84 Reagan was able to bag a huge chunk of John Anderson '80s voters, which sealed his fate in the Suburbs of Northern States.

Now, back in the days when TV campaign commercials were much more influential than today, this classic Reagan '84 ad does a compare & contrasts, but with an upbeat and optimistic theme...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU-IBF8nwSY

The Democratic establishment selection of Mondale as their candidate in '84 was an awful choice that reminded voters of the economic pains of the late '70s ("Stagflation") rather than hitting Reagan on the economic austerity regime that caused widespread recession and poverty throughout our great country.

The country experienced major economic growth in 1983 and 1984 and the recession ended in late 1982(when Reagan economic policies started to really take affect). The Major economic recession under Reagan happened in 1981-1982(which by the way was way to early for it to be his fault). The idea that saying the countries economy was better in 1980 then 1984 is just not even close to being true.

On poverty here are the numbers(from 1976): https://www.infoplease.com/business-finance/poverty-and-income/persons-below-poverty-level-us-1975-2010


1976: 11.8%
1977: 11.6%
1978: 11.4%
1979: 11.7%
1980: 13%
1981: 14%
1982: 15%
1983: 15.2%
1984: 14.4%


As you can see from those numbers once Reagan policies started to take affect the poverty rate started to drop ( and for 1983 grow slower the previous year).

oh and here's the numbers the rest of his admin

1985: 14%
1986: 13.6%
1987: 13.4%
1988: 13%
1989: 12.8%
Logged
Liberalrocks
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,923
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 25, 2017, 09:08:31 PM »
« Edited: June 25, 2017, 09:11:52 PM by Liberalrocks »

Mondale should have just barnstormed and camped out in Massachusetts and Rhode Island he only lost them by a couple of points, maybe Maryland too. He could have won a few states and not gotten the 49 state loser label.
Logged
BushKerry04
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 30, 2017, 10:43:40 PM »

Sure, Reagan was always going to win, but I feel like Mondale could have done much better. First of all, from what I've read, they held back on negativity towards Reagan because of his personal favorables. This seems idiotic, if your opponent is popular you should go all the more negative, since driving their numbers down should be your priority. Also, it seems from the ads he emphasized the deficit above all else, something most voters don't completely understand, yet alone care about. The second biggest issue was arms control, another loser for the Democrats in this period in time. I feel like he could have done a lot better by emphasizing jobs and healthcare.

Mondale might have been wise to pick a more moderate running-mate, perhaps Gary Hart.
Logged
Fuzzy Won't Cover Up Biden's Senility
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,428
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 01, 2017, 08:06:02 PM »

In hindsight:

1.  Mondale should have selected a Southern Running Mate.  Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-TX) or Gov. Bob Graham (D-FL) would have been good choices.  Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-SC) would have been my top pick.

2.  Mondale should NEVER have said he would raise taxes; that KILLED him.  And no one believed that the Democratic Party was serious about deficit reduction.

3.  Mondale should have addressed the developing Farm issues with "The Marshall Plan for the Family Farm", developing policy initiatives to make family farms more viable.

4.  Mondale should have ran as a flag-waving Union man, unabashedly for labor, and he should have taken the offensive to show Reagan as the enemy of the union man and the enemy of working folks.

He should have avoided social liberalism like the plague. 

Mondale was a horrible candidate who ran a horrible campaign.  I don't think my plan would have helped much.
Logged
Alabama_Indy10
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,319
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 03, 2017, 08:41:24 AM »

If he had Lloyd Bentsen or Mike Dukakis as a running mate, he wouldn't have done as poorly.

The problem with Ferraro is it made Democrats seem more interested in diversity than qualifications.

That can arguably be said of today's Democratic Party
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,995
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: July 03, 2017, 08:47:02 AM »

In hindsight:

1.  Mondale should have selected a Southern Running Mate.  Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (D-TX) or Gov. Bob Graham (D-FL) would have been good choices.  Sen. Ernest Hollings (D-SC) would have been my top pick.

2.  Mondale should NEVER have said he would raise taxes; that KILLED him.  And no one believed that the Democratic Party was serious about deficit reduction.

3.  Mondale should have addressed the developing Farm issues with "The Marshall Plan for the Family Farm", developing policy initiatives to make family farms more viable.

4.  Mondale should have ran as a flag-waving Union man, unabashedly for labor, and he should have taken the offensive to show Reagan as the enemy of the union man and the enemy of working folks.

He should have avoided social liberalism like the plague. 

Mondale was a horrible candidate who ran a horrible campaign.  I don't think my plan would have helped much.

Didn't he...?
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,349
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 03, 2017, 09:42:17 AM »

Not much. The timing was just bad, because the economy improved by late 1983/early 1984. Had the election been in 1982, it would have been a toss-up.


What sunk Mondale as well as his ineffectual debate performance was the fact that Geraldine Ferraro's husband's ethics got the best of the campaign.  Mondale would had to dump Ferraro and thus he would have angered women voters and they got him through the primaries.

Actually I disagree on that one. The only really strong debate moment of Reagan was the age joke in the foreign policy discussion. His performance in the domestic debate was awful. Probably Reagan was already in the early stages of Alzheimer's by 1984. He often seemed confused and it took him relatively long to give a response. He was far more vital and agile in the 1980 debate with Jimmy Carter.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,255


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: July 03, 2017, 12:10:34 PM »

Not much. The timing was just bad, because the economy improved by late 1983/early 1984. Had the election been in 1982, it would have been a toss-up.


What sunk Mondale as well as his ineffectual debate performance was the fact that Geraldine Ferraro's husband's ethics got the best of the campaign.  Mondale would had to dump Ferraro and thus he would have angered women voters and they got him through the primaries.

Actually I disagree on that one. The only really strong debate moment of Reagan was the age joke in the foreign policy discussion. His performance in the domestic debate was awful. Probably Reagan was already in the early stages of Alzheimer's by 1984. He often seemed confused and it took him relatively long to give a response. He was far more vital and agile in the 1980 debate with Jimmy Carter.


Dont most incumbent presidents to bad in the debates:


I mean both bush and obama did significantly worse in 04 and 12 debates then 00 and 08 debates.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
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 0.062 seconds with 13 queries.