Candidate Gary Hart

[Virginian87]

What if he hadn't had that affair and survived to run in the 1988 primaries?  Would he have gone on to win the Democratic nomination instead of Dukakis?  He seemed like a pretty charismatic guy, or at least more so than Dukakis, so I actually think that had he won the nomination he could have beaten George H.W. Bush.  What do the rest of you all think?

[Q]

I think he definitely would have won the nomination.  Not sure about the general, though, honestly.

[WalterMitty]

he would have won the nomination and likely the general.

[Dr. Cynic]

Gary Hart was probably destined for the Presidency, had he kept his big mouth shut, or kept it in his pants. He was charismatic, likeable, and had appeal. He should've not dared the press to follow him, or he should've dropped Donna Rice like a hot potato if he was going to challenge the press like that.

[adam]

Unlike Dukakis, he could have held on to a 23 point (or however much it was) lead and won the general over Bush. I would have much rather seen Bentsen on the top of the ticket though.

EDIT: I ran it through the 1988 scenario on PF and got the following results.

[True Democrat]

Hart/Bentsen vs. Bush/Quayle (I think Bentsen still would have been a logical choice, Hart needed an establishment candidate):


280-258 Hart win

1984 with Hart as nominee:

397-141 Reagan win

[jokerman]

Hart would have cracked more of the south than that, both times.

[True Democrat]

Hart would have cracked more of the south than that, both times.

Against Reagan, no way

Against Bush, it's possible, but Bush actually did better than Reagan in many Southern counties.

[jokerman]

Hart would have cracked more of the south than that, both times.

Against Reagan, no way

Against Bush, it's possible, but Bush actually did better than Reagan in many Southern counties.

Um, no.  Reagan, especially, wasn't a great deal more popular in the south compared to the rest of the nation.  Look at 1980 county map.

[True Democrat]

Hart would have cracked more of the south than that, both times.

Against Reagan, no way

Against Bush, it's possible, but Bush actually did better than Reagan in many Southern counties.

Um, no.  Reagan, especially, wasn't a great deal more popular in the south compared to the rest of the nation.  Look at 1980 county map.

But Bush actually did better in many Southern counties than Reagan, and even did better in the entire state of Tennessee.  It was very surprising to me.

For example, compare the 1984 and 1988 Georgia maps:

1984:


1988:

[kashifsakhan]

he would have won the nomination and likely the general.