Which non incumbent primary candidates were considered the most inevitable

[OSR stands with Israel]

to win their party's nomination , the November of the year before election year.

I believe the top 5 is:


1. Gore in Nov 1999
2. Bush in Nov 1999
3. Reagan in Nov 1979(according to wiki he was considered the odds on favorite , and had such a big lead he was the only candidate to be polled against Carter)
4. Hillary in Nov 2015
5. Hillary in Nov 2007

[Mr. Morden]

Honestly, Clinton in November 2015 should be at the top.  She was at ~90% in the betting markets at that point.  Bush and Gore in Nov. 1999 weren't that high.  Yes, Gore went on to win every single state, but November was still before Bradley's poll numbers had collapsed, so him winning New Hampshire and then using momentum from that to win the nomination was still treated as a serious possibility.

[Mr. Morden]

Oh, and keep in mind that while Bush in 1999 was way ahead in the polls, he didn't actually agree to participate in any debates until December 1999, so he was still kind of an unknown quantity in November.  Thus, there was at least a little bit of hedging with him.

[Rookie Yinzer]

I would think Bush 41, Gore, and Hillary (both times) would be the only ones that applied.

[Mr. Morden]

I would think Bush 41, Gore, and Hillary (both times) would be the only ones that applied.

I guess Clinton in Nov. 2007 is in the conversation just because November was in the middle of a polling dip for Obama.  But if you looked at 2007 as a whole, then no way would that one be in the top five.  There've been tons of frontrunners who looked more inevitable than Clinton did, say, in the summer of 2007, including, e.g., Dole in 1995.

[Rookie Yinzer]

How was Mondale viewed in November 1983?

[OSR stands with Israel]

I would think Bush 41, Gore, and Hillary (both times) would be the only ones that applied.

I guess Clinton in Nov. 2007 is in the conversation just because November was in the middle of a polling dip for Obama.  But if you looked at 2007 as a whole, then no way would that one be in the top five.  There've been tons of frontrunners who looked more inevitable than Clinton did, say, in the summer of 2007, including, e.g., Dole in 1995.

Reagan in Nov 1979 also seemed inevitable, as he was the only person polled against Carter , had most of the endorsements going against a pretty weak field .


I don't think Bush 41 in Nov 1987 was considered to be that much ahead of Dole/Kemp.





Gallup also showed  Gore up by 25 in Nov 1999 :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2000 , While I believe by November of 2015 Bernie had reduced Hillary lead to less than 15 points.

[Mr. Morden]

Gallup also showed  Gore up by 25 in Nov 1999 :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_2000 , While I believe by November of 2015 Bernie had reduced Hillary lead to less than 15 points.

Polling #s aren't everything though.  Clinton had rock solid establishment support, and so there was always the thought that the party elite would pull out all the stops to stop Sanders.  Meanwhile, Bradley was an insurgent candidate, sure, but not really a party outsider in the sense that Sanders was.  If Bradley had caught up to Gore, and was doing better in general election matchups, then much of the party elite would have had no problem defecting to the Bradley camp.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

I seriously despise Bill Bradly in a way that is honestly completely unmatched by my views on almost any other Democrat (Ben Cardin and Joe Manchin and Joe Lieberman are examples of others Democrats I despise on this level).

[mianfei]

How was Mondale viewed in November 1983?

He was viewed as being strongly challenged by Gary Hart and even Jesse Jackson, almost until the national Democratic conventions.

Going back to the earliest primaries in 1912, the most inevitable have been as far as I know:

• Herbert Hoover in 1928
• Al Smith in 1928
• Adlai Stevenson in 1956
• Richard Nixon in 1960
• Ronald Reagan in 1980
• George Bush senior in 1988
• Bob Dole in 1996
• Al Gore in 2000
• John Kerry in 2004

[Arbitrage1980]

Honestly, Clinton in November 2015 should be at the top.  She was at ~90% in the betting markets at that point.  Bush and Gore in Nov. 1999 weren't that high.  Yes, Gore went on to win every single state, but November was still before Bradley's poll numbers had collapsed, so him winning New Hampshire and then using momentum from that to win the nomination was still treated as a serious possibility.

Gore is the only non-incumbent to win every single state in a primary.

[darklordoftech]

I seriously despise Bill Bradly in a way that is honestly completely unmatched by my views on almost any other Democrat

Why?

[Mr. Smith]

Dewey in 1948
Eisenhower in 1952
Nixon in 1960
Gore in 2000
Hillary both times

And Rubio for 2016

[OSR stands with Israel]

Dewey in 1948
Eisenhower in 1952
Nixon in 1960
Gore in 2000
Hillary both times

And Rubio for 2016

No just no , Trump and Carson led in all the polls in November of 2015, and IKE was in a very close race with Taft.


Reagan in 1979 and Bush in 1999 were clearly more inevitable. Reagan in 1979 was literally the only polled Republican candidate against Carter, got the most endorsements , and was Supported by the Business and Western Establishment, and considered the odds on favorite  (HW really wasnt expected to have a chance of beating him until Iowa, and the anti Reagan forces hoped Ford jumped into the race to stop him).

Bush in 1999 was leading by a mile in the polls  , had the most money , most name recognition, was supported by the entire establishment ,   was supported by the Conservative Base and was dominating the field.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

I seriously despise Bill Bradly in a way that is honestly completely unmatched by my views on almost any other Democrat

Why?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment

so many lives have been ruined by this law.

[buritobr]

5. Hillary in Nov 2007

No. She was still favorite in November 2007, but we had heard about Obama since November 2004

[Mr. Morden]

Honestly, Clinton in November 2015 should be at the top.  She was at ~90% in the betting markets at that point.  Bush and Gore in Nov. 1999 weren't that high.  Yes, Gore went on to win every single state, but November was still before Bradley's poll numbers had collapsed, so him winning New Hampshire and then using momentum from that to win the nomination was still treated as a serious possibility.

Gore is the only non-incumbent to win every single state in a primary.

But the question wasn't about how they ultimately did, but how inevitable they were viewed in November of the previous year.

[Phony Moderate]

How was Mondale viewed in November 1983?

He was viewed as being strongly challenged by Gary Hart and even Jesse Jackson, almost until the national Democratic conventions.

Going back to the earliest primaries in 1912, the most inevitable have been as far as I know:

• Herbert Hoover in 1928
• Al Smith in 1928
• Adlai Stevenson in 1956
• Richard Nixon in 1960
• Ronald Reagan in 1980
• George Bush senior in 1988
• Bob Dole in 1996
• Al Gore in 2000
• John Kerry in 2004

Kerry was not only not inevitable in November 2003, but his campaign was considered to be as good as done. It was around that time, IIRC, that people were suggesting he should do a deal with Howard Dean to drop out in order to become a prospective Secretary of State. Dean and Gephardt were seen as the frontrunners, and remained so until they suddenly collapsed in favour of Kerry and Edwards in the days leading up to the Iowa caucus.