which presidential candidate was weaker?

[WalterMitty]

id lean towards dukakis.

i know it is tempting to say mondale since he carried only one state.  but one must remember he was going against an extremely popular incumbent.

hypothetically speaking, mondale could have performed better in 88 than dukakis.

[© Tweed the Younger]

Dukakis, because 1988 was a winnable race.  1984 and 1996 weren't really competitive.

[WalterMitty]

Dukakis, because 1988 was a winnable race.  1984 and 1996 weren't really competitive.

did dukakis do better than jesse jackson would have done?  people forget just how close jackson came to winning the nomination.

[Clay]

I voted for Mondale in 84 before giving it much thought...but Tweed is probably right.

[Boris]

Mike Dukakis.

Dukakis actually lead Bush by 17 points after the Democratic National Convention (of course, there's no way any candidate could've held that margin). Mondale and Dole never had the luxury of leading their respective opponents.

[dazzleman]

Dukakis, because 1988 was a winnable race.  1984 and 1996 weren't really competitive.

did dukakis do better than jesse jackson would have done?  people forget just how close jackson came to winning the nomination.

I think Dukakis definitely did better than Jackson would have done.  Jackson would most likely only have carried Washington DC.  It would have been a 50-state defeat.  A 40-state defeat is better than a 50-state defeat.

[Dr. Cynic]

Dukakis managed to squander a huge lead. Mondale never had a chance to begin with, and he actually came out swinging in the great debates with Reagan. I feel kinda sorry for Bob Dole's peanut butter and Bob Dole's chair... They all never had a chance.

[jokerman]

Dukakis was weakest, in my opinion.

[Nym90]

Dukakis, because 1988 was a winnable race.  1984 and 1996 weren't really competitive.

I agree completely.

[Joel the Attention Whore]

Walter Mondale and Bob Dole were experienced politicians, having spent a life in Washington.  Mike Dukakis was an ultra-liberal from my state who was weak on crime.  The previous statement may not be true, but the fact that he let himself be portrayed as that shows his weakness as a candidate.

[Virginian87]

The 1988 Democratic ticket would have won had Lloyd Bentsen been running for president and Dukakis for veep.

[Joel the Attention Whore]

The 1988 Democratic ticket would have won had Lloyd Bentsen been running for president and Dukakis for veep.

True.

[Michael Z]

The 1988 Democratic ticket would have won had Lloyd Bentsen been running for president and Dukakis for veep.

True.

I also agree with that.

[kashifsakhan]

The 1988 Democratic ticket would have won had Lloyd Bentsen been running for president and Dukakis for veep.

True.

I also agree with that.

me too. I've said that so many times, then again, so has almost everyone who discusses the 88 campaign..

[Dr. Cynic]

The 1988 Democratic ticket would have won had Lloyd Bentsen been running for president and Dukakis for veep.

True.

I also agree with that.

me too. I've said that so many times, then again, so has almost everyone who discusses the 88 campaign..

I agree completely as well. On a score of fitness, Senator Bentsen far outshined the head of the ticket. In my opinion, he deserved a shot at the Presidency, and probably would have won.

[MarkWarner08]

Dukakis was the weakest of the bunch. From Willie Horton to the tank, he was an utter embarrassment.

[Brutus]

Dukakis was like a preview of John Kerry.  Both dull north-easterners that put you to sleep when they talked.  Ultimately, Dukakis was done in by Bush's false promise:  "Read my lips, no new taxes."

[© Tweed the Younger]

Dukakis was like a preview of John Kerry.  Both dull north-easterners that put you to sleep when they talked.  Ultimately, Dukakis was done in by Bush's false promise:  "Read my lips, no new taxes."

No, he was done in by the "if your wife was raped" question, Willie Horton, and the tank.

[Reignman]

Mondale. Dukakis is a close second. Dole did OK compared to both those guys.

[Max]

Walter Mondale and Bob Dole were experienced politicians, having spent a life in Washington.  Mike Dukakis was an ultra-liberal from my state who was weak on crime.  The previous statement may not be true, but the fact that he let himself be portrayed as that shows his weakness as a candidate.

Dukakis was a DLC-guy and very pragmatic.

[Max]

Dukakis was a DLC-guy and very pragmatic.

Reality called.  She wants a divorce. 

You, apparently, have already begun the paperwork.

You know, that's what I read about him and what most people told me about him.

But of course, for some people everyone who is to the left of Reagan is seen as an "ultra-liberal".

[adam]

While Dukakis threw away what should have been an easy election for the Democrats, he never pledged to raise taxes like Mondale did. It's tough, but any candidate stupid enough to say he is going to raise taxes during a run for president is definiately a weak one.

[Michael Z]

While Dukakis threw away what should have been an easy election for the Democrats,

I still think Bush was a shoo-in for '88 and Dukakis was the proverbial lamb to the slaughter. That said, Hart probably could have given Bush a run for his money had it not been for the Donna Rice affair.

[adam]

While Dukakis threw away what should have been an easy election for the Democrats,

I still think Bush was a shoo-in for '88 and Dukakis was the proverbial lamb to the slaughter. That said, Hart probably could have given Bush a run for his money had it not been for the Donna Rice affair.

Dukakis had something like a 17 point lead after the Democratic Convention. Regardless of who you are running against, it is hard to lose by as much as Dukakis did, after leading by as much as he did.

[Flyerkid10]

I would also have to say Dukakis, Reagan and Clinton were not going to be defeated.