Why was nobody madly for Adlai?

[P.J. McDuff]

If I may be blunt, how come Adlai Stevenson's performance in Presidential Elections sucked so much? I accept he was up against one of the best Presidents of the century, but I'm surprised he didn't do better in the Northeast and Illinois, whatever about '56 but in 1952 I find it baffling that a candidate like him didn't do better.

[Reignman]

He was boring, and IKE was a pimp.

[NewFederalist]

This is akin to the "Could anyone have beaten Reagan in 1984?" thread. It really wasn't that Stevenson was unpopular but Ike was the hero of D-Day and the ETO of WW II. Besides, the Democrats had won every presidential election since 1932. After 5 in a row I think it is amazing Stevenson did as well as he did!

[gorkay]

Ike was unbeatable, and people were tired of the Democrats after all those years in power. Also, Ike was a moderate, which was the right place to be in the fifties to get elected... if Taft had been nominated by the Republicans in '52, Stevenson might have won.
I think Adlai might have won in 1960 had he waited until then to make his second run. It's never been adequately explained to my knowledge why he chose to do so in a totally lost cause. He would have been smarter to do as Nixon did in '64, let someone else take the fall in '56, then come back in '60.

[Dr. Cynic]

It's too bad, because Eisenhower was a good President, and Stevenson would've been good as well.

As far as what Reignman said, nothing could be further from the truth. Stevenson was an accomplished, and witty campaigner. Eisenhower could actually be considered the more drab of the two.

Stevenson was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[johnpressman]

Stevenson was considered an "egghead" both in appearance and demeanor.  He was very popular among Northeastern liberals but he did not transfer well to the Midwest and Far West and his candidacy brought the first real cracks in the Democratic "Solid South".

That being said, Eisenhower was unbeatable im 1952 and 1956.  A popular war hero running as a Republican after 20 years of Democratic rule, come on!

As for why did Stevenson campaign in 1956 instead of waiting for 1960?  Good question.   A motive for running may be the fact that Adlai was already out of office, the Illinois Governorship was held by Republican William Stratton, and he thought that 1956 was his last year of viability.  I remember someone telling JFK that he was too young and that he should wait for 1964.  JFK replied that by then there will be fresher faces on the horizon and that his time was now.

 Also, Ike had serious health problems in 1955.  Possibly Adlai thought that he would not run for reelection.   Anyway, the nomination of one of the two major political parties for the office of POTUS is nothing to sneeze at.  After all, ANYTHING can happen!

[Dr. Cynic]

Actually, after Ike's heart attack, Stevenson's chances were never better. If Ike had been incapacitated any longer than he had, it's likely that Adlai could've pulled out a win.

[Cubby]

As for the 1952 election, Harry Truman's poll numbers that year were in the 20's, so there was a lot of resentment towards the party in power. (Sound familar?)  The low numbers were due to the Gov't takeover of the steel mills and possibly the Korean War.

[gorkay]

Actually, after Ike's heart attack, Stevenson's chances were never better. If Ike had been incapacitated any longer than he had, it's likely that Adlai could've pulled out a win.

True, and if Ike had been unable or unwilling to run for a second term, Stevenson's chances would have been good. But by the time the campaign for the nomination got underway, it was clear that Ike would run again. Unless Stevenson was gambling that he'd have additional health problems, which is possible, and possibly why he never gave a clear explanation of why he did run. (How would it have sounded for him to say, "I was hoping Ike would have to drop out?")
I've also heard it speculated that Stevenson felt he owed it to the party to run, because he was persuaded he'd make a better race of it than anyone else and, even if he lost, would keep the Dems from suffering major losses in Congress and the State Houses. The field of Democratic challengers was extremely thin that year. If this is true, I wonder how he felt when the Kennedy camp called him a "loser" in 1960.

[Adlai Stevenson]

Stevenson served as an important leader in the 1950s who prevented the Democrats from falling into the clutches of Southern racists and conservatives.  Looking at the results of 1952 and 1956, I also think he did quite well considering.  Eisenhower never won with over 60% of the vote despite being a popular war hero and commander in chief.

[johnpressman]

Did you ever hear this one? In 1956. Joe Kennedy offered to finance LBJ for a Presidential run if he took JFK as Vice President.  Johnson declined, and RFK thought him an "ingrate"!

Also, why was there such a bitter floor fight for the 1956 Democratic Vice Presidential nod if it was obvious that Ike was going to win big???  Once agian, ANYTHING can happen and you can never turn down a chance at your party's nomination for President.  You may never get another chance!

[Michael Z]

Did you ever hear this one? In 1956. Joe Kennedy offered to finance LBJ for a Presidential run if he took JFK as Vice President.  Johnson declined, and RFK thought him an "ingrate"!

Never heard this one. Very interesting.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This may explain by McGovern and Mondale were all too willing to be the proverbial lambs to the slaughter, but that's neither here nor there, I suppose.

[Gustaf]

Did you ever hear this one? In 1956. Joe Kennedy offered to finance LBJ for a Presidential run if he took JFK as Vice President.  Johnson declined, and RFK thought him an "ingrate"!

Never heard this one. Very interesting.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This may explain by McGovern and Mondale were all too willing to be the proverbial lambs to the slaughter, but that's neither here nor there, I suppose.

A vice-presidential nod, even if you lose, is a stepping stone towards a later presidential nomination. Look at Shriver, Dole, Edwards and so on.

[johnpressman]

Sargent Shriver, McGovern's  last minute substitue for Sen. Thomas Eagelton in 1972, never won his party's nomination for President.  You must be thinking of Walter Mondale.   Edwards may RUN for the nomination but he's a long-shot with Hillary and Obama, etc., as for Dole, he was the 1976 Republican Vice Presidential candidate and won his party's Presidential nomination after numerous tries, in 1996, twenty years later!

How about FDR, who was the Democratic Vice Presidential Candidate in 1920, before he had polio, then won the 1932 Presidential Nomination, twelve years later!

Anyway, using an unsucessful run for the Vice Presidency as a stepping stone to the next election's Presidential nomination seems like a risky strategy.  More likely, you will be a reminder of a losing effort and the party will go in search of fresher faces untainted by defeat.  JFK obviously thought otherwise, figuring that  a run with LBJ or Adlai to probable defeat by Ike in 1956 would gain him the national exposure to win the top spot in 1960.  Go figure.