A scary thought. Since FDR, there has been only

[pnwmom]

one Democratic President to win re-election: Bill Clinton.

I hope no one here's taking Obama's re-election for granted -- he needs the concerted efforts of as many of us as possible.

[Journeyman]

1. Since FDR, only two Democrats have stood for re-election. . .

so by that matrix, we're at 50% . . .

[stlsaxman]

2. correct- and only one lost re-election, right?

Carter?

[leeroysphitz]

10. Ted Kennedy, god rest his soul, screwed Carter out of re-election. n/t

[BlueIris]

11. Carter's reelection was impossible.

The lesson of 1980 is that presidents who have zero chance of being reelected should stand aside for the most politically viable alternative.

History might have been better had Carter allowed Kennedy (or anyone else) to be nominated.

[roscoeroscoe]

23. am i correct in remembering that carter was leading until the hostage crisis was prolonged?

...by the october surprise?

there was a lot of bad feeling toward carter on the left; i remember the poster that said 'hold your nose and vote for carter.' not the way to win, there...

[former9thward]

26. His election was not impossible.

The Gallup poll in January, 1980 showed Carter 63%, Reagan 32%. Current events worked against him.

[provis99]

12. that makes absolutely no sense at all.

but blame liberals if you want to; that's bloodsport around DU these days.

[pnwmom]

6. LBJ, for one, knew he probably wouldn't be reelected.

[fujiyama]

17. Johnson was unlikely to be nominated in the first place

but had he been, the race with Nixon may have been competitive. Johnson was a very effective campaigner and politician, even though Vietnam has largely ruined his legacy. 1968 was a close election.

I agree it's unlikely he would have won, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that he could have...

[WI_DEM]

20. Actually most convention delegates in 1968 were decided not by primary but by

the party regulars and state committees. Johnson probably would have been nominated. As it is Humphrey even at the time of Robert Kennedy's death was leading in overall delegates despite having not competed in primaries. Humphrey won delegates in state like PA & MI thru organized labor which also supported LBJ over both RFK & McCarthy. Labor leaders were at (mostly) the time hawks.

[PSPS]

3. Not really a fair comparison

Truman didn't run for reelection

Kennedy was killed

Johnson didn't run for reelection. Bobby Kennedy would have won handily had he not been killed.

Carter was the only one who "lost" a second term, but only because of Reagan's criminal conspiracy with the Iranians.

[Scuba]

15. +1

[rug]

18. Although he was elected as an incumbent, polls notwithstanding.

[treestar]

27. +20000

[Amster Dan]

4. So Obama can make history again!

But I agree with you that we shouldn't take anything for granted.

[boxman15]

5. This is a little misleading.

Harry Truman never ran for re-election, and after 4 years that was basically a re-election campaign for him anyway.

John F. Kennedy died, but almost certainly would've won re-election.

Lyndon B. Johnson didn't run for re-election.

Only Carter and Clinton ran for re-election, so we're batting .500.

[pnwmom]

7. Johnson wouldn't have won.

[bornskeptic]

8. There have only been two who ran for re-election.

On the other hand, since 1900 incumbent Democratic presidents have won 7 times out of 8 attempts.
Wilson
FDR 3 times
Truman
Johnson
Clinton

Carter was the only one to lose.

[demtenjeep]

9. Carter was too trusting of the people that were supposed to be working FOR him

and Reagan and Co pretty much screwed him with the hostages.

[Drunken Irishman]

13. I never liked this statistic...

It skews in favor of Republicans because of certain circumstances that made reelection very difficult for any Democrat.

1) Democrats were not going to win in '52, regardless if Truman ran. They had held the White House for 20 years and that pretty much is an unprecedented grip on power for any party. The Republicans were due that election and solidified their chances by nominating a very popular wartime figure, Gen. Eisenhower.

Truman, of course, won one election on his own, though served almost an entire eight years because he took over after FDR's death in 1945. So, while he didn't officially win reelection in '48, the party did - for the fifth consecutive time!

2) Similar to Truman, LBJ won an election outright and decided not to run. He wouldn't have won, of course, but again, the Democrats held the White House for eight years and it's rare for a party to win three consecutive presidential elections (in fact, since FDR's third & fourth term wins and Truman's first, it's only happened once - Bush succeeding Reagan in '88). Yes, LBJ was unpopular and wouldn't have won had he run - but had Kennedy not been assassinated, he almost surely wins in '64, allowing the Democrats to claim a true reelection.

Basically, the only reason Clinton was the first Democrat to win reelection since Roosevelt is because he was only the second Democrat since Roosevelt's first election to actually ascend to the presidency through a general election. Truman & LBJ both took over after their predecessor died in office.

Carter really is the only loser in that stretch if you think about it.

So, that statistic is extremely misleading.

[Thinkingabout]

14. We can not count GWB as a re-election.

He was awarded his first term and was elected one time. Only Carter and Clinton ran for re-election so repubs really don't have much to brag about. We are going to have to get out and vote or being lazy can surely lose this time. Strength is going to be in sane Dems voting to out do the crazy repubs, we can do this.

[99th_Monkey]

16. I think you are being WAY too generous.

Yes, the Shrub's first "win" was given to him by SCOTUS,
but his second was handed to him by Diebold.

I know it's not fashionable, since Obama won, to bring
up the abomination of "electronic voting", but I just
couldn't resist.

Bush is the "President who never was".

[jeff47]

19. This stat, while technically true, is very misleading.

Truman and LBJ's elections were basically re-election.

[sofa king]

21. Another thought:

There have been at least four successful attempts at election theft by Republicans since 1972.

* The Watergate break-in was an attempt to steal an election by stealing the opposition's confidential documents.

* The October Surprise was a back-door negotiation to keep American citizens in captivity in Iran for the remainder of President Carter's tenure, to swing the election for Ronald Reagan.

* Bush v. Gore ensured that the one possible way that George Bush could win that state would be the way it went down.

* Ohio's exit polls in 2004 (not the final exit poll, which is fudged to fit the results) suggest that John Kerry won that state. As usual, a key witness died before he could testify.

(There is a known cover-up associated with each one of those incidents, so don't waste my time by claiming two of those incidents are not proven. The cover-up proves that a crime larger than the penalty for the cover-up occurred and was successfully concealed. That is all one needs to know.)

Exit polls also failed to match the results--almost always in favor of the GOP--in 2008, but the election was such a blowout that it went largely unnoticed.

All of those incidents go above and beyond the usual Republican tactics of caging, purging voter rolls, enacting voter i.d. laws, and so on.

The flip-side of that coin is that if an election season has all the markings of a blowout, as this one does, it is in the interests of Republicans to avoid election theft, because those efforts might be statistically identifiable, with a favorable climate for prosecution the following year.

Which could make the impending victory even larger than many of us anticipate.

[Bluenorthwest]

22. Or an exciting thought, since FDR only one Democrat has LOST re-election....

Glass half full and all that. We all know, or should know, the details and I can not say I find the framing in the OP to be the framing I'd select for those details.
Since FDR, how many Democratic politicians have we had who were as good as Obama as politicians? One, Bill Clinton. Who won re-election? Bill Clinton. Who did he beat? The remains of Bob Dole. Dole was dull and stiff, yet compared to Romney Dole looks like Robin Williams circa 1980.

[Ex-Pat Pats Fan]

25. Yes!

Let's not fall into the four-year trap of pessimism.

[grantcart]

24. In the last 5 Presidential elections Democrats have won the popular vote 4 times with more than

21 million vote advantage.

You are right to warn against complacence but we should also know that the country is middle left now not middle right.

[Springslips]

28. Here is a scary thought for Zombie

Since 1992, no Republican has won more than 286 electoral college votes. Since then, the average electoral votes the douche bags have average is 211.4 votes every presidential election.

The Democrats have not gained less than 252 in that time span and have averaged 326.60 per election.

The Republicans have had three elections where they didn't reach above 200-electoral votes since 1992. The democrats have had at least 252-electoral college votes in those five elections; 252 being the least amount of votes gained by the good guys—WHICH IS MORE THAN WHAT THE REPUKES HAVE AVERAGED SINCE 1992!

I call it a trend.