Call me crazy. Call me insane. Call me koo koo, but....

[Yavin4]

Am I wrong to take comfort in an unsettled Dem presidential primary race?

Since 1992, in three of the non-incumbent, presidential Dem primary races, 2000, 2004, and 2016, there was a clear very early favorite in the primaries, Gore, Kerry, and Hillary Clinton. Each one went to "lose" the presidential election, ("lose in the sense of an electoral college sense.)

In two of the non-incumbent presidential Dem primary races, 1992 and 2008, the primaries were very unsettled and the nominee wasn't confirmed until very late in the process. In the end, the Dems won both presidential elections.

I am comforted by the fact that the Dems don't have a clear favorite to win the nomination at this point, and that we are the underdogs.

My theory is that our nominees tend to do better in the general election when they have to fight through a tough Dem primary schedule. Everyone's blood gets up and more voters become active in the process.

When there's a clear, early favorite, voters sort of lose interest or take the entire election for granted.

[katmondoo]

1. You are right, that is why I think the debate last night was good for us.

[abqtommy]

2. Just remember that in 2016 we "lost" in the sense that we were ratfucked.