Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 30, 2015, 03:00:23 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Delicious Steak Pentagram)
| | |-+  Year with the best group of candidates
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Year with the best group of candidates  (Read 5508 times)
Warner for President '16
benconstine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30368
United States



View Profile
« on: January 10, 2009, 09:11:26 pm »
Ignore

So, in your opinion, what election had the best group of candidates running for President?  You can define that by the primaries, the convention (pre 1972), or by the general election.  I'm inclined to say 1976, based on the great Democratic field.
Logged

Obama High's debate team:

"Now let me be clear...I...I...um...uh...now let me be clear.  I strongly condemn the affirmative in the strongest possible terms, and I am closely monitoring their arguments.  Let me be clear on this."
Boomer Sooner Bushie
BushOklahoma
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 24511
Kenya


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2009, 11:48:54 pm »
Ignore

I would say 2008.  Every election cycle it seems as if we have to pick the lesser of two evils.  Last year (2008) was better, but still not great.
Logged

My earlier comment notwithstanding, I do think that the site would be better off if Inks left his position. (The fact that the village idiot has dropped in to express his support for him only confirms this.)
Senator PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23479
United States


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2009, 12:59:44 am »
Ignore

     1789
Logged

Raoul
burkenelson
Full Member
***
Posts: 140
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.87, S: -0.74

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2009, 05:45:03 am »
Ignore

1912! Epic showdown.
Logged

Nixon in '80
nixon1980
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1313
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.84, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2009, 10:44:25 pm »
Ignore

1980 had an all-star field for both parties:

Sitting President
vs.
The Liberal Lion
vs.
Moonbeam

The Great Communicator
vs.
Crazy Gov't Experience
vs.
Most Respected Man in Senate
vs.
Genuine War Hero
vs.
Conservative Firebrand
vs.
Mr. Independent
vs.
More Crazy Gov't Experience

I'll leave it to you to label all of those.
Logged

“Sarah Palin is the only part of the campaign that I won’t comment on publicly.” - Meghan McCain
Nym90
nym90
Modadmin
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15385
United States


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2009, 11:33:09 am »
Ignore

     1789

1792 wasn't bad either.
Logged
Warner for President '16
benconstine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30368
United States



View Profile
« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2009, 01:57:04 pm »
Ignore


No election until 1836 was
Logged

Obama High's debate team:

"Now let me be clear...I...I...um...uh...now let me be clear.  I strongly condemn the affirmative in the strongest possible terms, and I am closely monitoring their arguments.  Let me be clear on this."
phk
phknrocket1k
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12952


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2009, 02:35:48 pm »
Ignore

In recent times 2008, 1996, 1992.
Logged

Senator PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23479
United States


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2009, 03:45:05 pm »
Ignore


     1792 was indeed another good one. Smiley
Logged

Keystone Phil
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 52879


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: January 14, 2009, 04:56:59 pm »
Ignore

I think I would have absolutely loved 1980 and even 1976. 1976 would have been hard for me though since I have a great appreciation for both Reagan and Ford.
Logged



The entire country is pretty much Republican.
Trump 2016
Lief
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37521
Dominica


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: January 14, 2009, 09:58:25 pm »
Ignore

1912 of course.
Logged

THE FRONTRUNNER

yoman82
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 307


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: -5.22

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2009, 09:38:02 am »
Ignore

I'm going to have to go with 1992. Perot and Clinton in one year sounds pretty good to me.
Logged

Im not gonna to contiue this TL. U r all jelaous and blind. Ur liberal (see, correctli!) ideology dunno allow u to have just a fun Sad
August – US starts to bomb Keyna, where outsed Obama was creating a mercenary units to regain power
Erc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4680
Slovenia


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2009, 03:21:27 am »
Ignore

In recent times 2008, 1996, 1992.

The general election candidates in '96 were fine, certainly...but the primary candidates?  Apart from Dole, the Republican primary field was simply pathetic.
Logged
Nixon in '80
nixon1980
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1313
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.84, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2009, 06:05:45 am »
Ignore

In recent times 2008, 1996, 1992.

The general election candidates in '96 were fine, certainly...but the primary candidates?  Apart from Dole, the Republican primary field was simply pathetic.

It was certainly a diverse and interesting field... kind of a celebrity showcase of Republicans who had no business running for President (apart from Dole, of course). It may not have been a great field, but it was fun.
Logged

“Sarah Palin is the only part of the campaign that I won’t comment on publicly.” - Meghan McCain
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34396


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: January 24, 2009, 07:18:13 pm »
Ignore

1940-1956 weren't bad
Logged

pbrower2a
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12021
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: February 21, 2009, 11:28:27 am »
Ignore

1912 and 1992; there were three candidates in each election, including an incumbent President who lost.

1912 was the ultimate, including a fairly-good incumbent President who created no problems, a great ex-President (TR) who still had much to offer, and the winner Woodrow Wilson.

1968? If only Wallace hadn't been a racist.

Perot wasn't TR, but there is no question that had he won he would have left his mark. Perot won more popular votes than any 3rd Party candidate ever, and proportionally more than any since TR (but no electoral votes -- very different from racists Thurmond and Wallace who had their support concentrated in "Kukluxistan". That's a smear of the South then -- not now). 
Logged



Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.49
Αλληλεγγύη
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 34874
France


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -4.87

View Profile
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2009, 12:25:01 pm »
Ignore

1896 ( with two very modern candidates ), 1912 ( with the clash of progressivisms : Wilson vs Roosevelt ), 1960 ( A passionating and hardly-fought campaign ), 1976 ( two honest and moderate candidates ), 2000 ( if you put McCain at the place of Bush ).
Logged

RIP Greece. RIP European Federalism.



"It's easy to confuse what is with what ought to be, especially when what is has worked out in your favor."

Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones, ep. 5x09
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9100
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: February 26, 2009, 08:11:30 pm »
Ignore

1912, 1972, 2008.
Logged

Warner for President '16
benconstine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30368
United States



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2009, 06:33:21 pm »
Ignore

2008.

I actually think 2008 was a bad year.  None of the candidates were particularly great on either side, in the primaries or in the general.
Logged

Obama High's debate team:

"Now let me be clear...I...I...um...uh...now let me be clear.  I strongly condemn the affirmative in the strongest possible terms, and I am closely monitoring their arguments.  Let me be clear on this."
Psychic Octopus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9100
United States


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2009, 01:34:20 pm »
Ignore

2008.

I actually think 2008 was a bad year.  None of the candidates were particularly great on either side, in the primaries or in the general.

Really? that's kind of why I liked it. And if you look at all the major republican candidates, none of them were true conservatives (minus Thompson) so it was kind of funny to watch them pander to the base massivly.

For the Democrats, It was boring and lasted too long. I only enjoyed it in the beginning, and was hoping this struggle would go all the way to the convention.
Logged

Warner for President '16
benconstine
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30368
United States



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2009, 01:48:01 pm »
Ignore

2008.

I actually think 2008 was a bad year.  None of the candidates were particularly great on either side, in the primaries or in the general.

Really? that's kind of why I liked it. And if you look at all the major republican candidates, none of them were true conservatives (minus Thompson) so it was kind of funny to watch them pander to the base massivly.

For the Democrats, It was boring and lasted too long. I only enjoyed it in the beginning, and was hoping this struggle would go all the way to the convention.

It was certainly an interesting primary season, but the candidates weren't all that good.  Some years, like 1976, saw a collection of great candidates run for President; that was lacking in 2008, I thought.
Logged

Obama High's debate team:

"Now let me be clear...I...I...um...uh...now let me be clear.  I strongly condemn the affirmative in the strongest possible terms, and I am closely monitoring their arguments.  Let me be clear on this."
pogo stick
JewishConservative
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3488
United States


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2009, 10:24:11 pm »
Ignore

1980.
Logged

Economic score: -6.80
Social score: -0.97
I'm a crazy Liberal  Troll. LAWL

ndvc ,b., b


CRAZY GAY TROLL LIBRAL FROM ALABAMAS
Alabama is dum redecks!


Gays and minorites are sexeh
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6550
United States


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2009, 11:32:00 pm »
Ignore

I would say 2008.  Every election cycle it seems as if we have to pick the lesser of two evils.  Last year (2008) was better, but still not great.

2008 had the best selection of candidates in any election since at least 1956, and probably the best we're likely to have in any election while I'm alive.
Logged

Alexander Hamilton
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9307
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.58, S: -5.13

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: August 07, 2009, 01:50:27 am »
Ignore

1948 and 1960, I guess. I don't think I could be undecided in any election. Too many concrete differences between the candidates.
Logged

people suck
hcallega
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1526
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

View Profile
« Reply #24 on: August 07, 2009, 02:06:15 pm »
Ignore

For me 1988 has got to be a good one, at least on the Democratic side. While the candidates weren't great, you really saw all the different parts of the Democratic Party in one race:
Dukakis/Simon: Liberals
Hart/Biden: Yuppies
Gephardt: Labor
Jackson: Minorities
Gore/Babbit: Moderates (if Clinton had run it would have been interesting to see what would have happened)

This is a big reason why there was no one frontrunner, whereas if Cuomo or Kennedy had run you would have seen a much more united field (Liberals, Labor, Minorities at the very least).

1976 was good, but the campaigns of a lot of Democrats sort of died (Bayh, Humphrey, Jackson, Udall)
Logged


"There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America."-President William Jefferson Clinton
"There is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America."-Senator Barack Obama
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines