I'm Always Amazed at How UNPREDICTABLE Democratic Primaries Are

[liberalpragmatist]

The track record of the Democrats is almost always that if the presidency is open, then the initial frontrunner in the race WILL NOT BE the nominee, w/ the exception of Al Gore, who was incumbent VP. Although, even w/ incumbent VP's and Pres.'s the Democratic primary can still be unpredicatble. Contrast this with the Republicans, who always select their nominee ahead of time. THe only cases where really the nominee is someone other than the initial frontrunner are 1964 and 1968.

1) 1960
Democratic
Initial Frontrunner: Lyndon Johnson
Hubert Humphrey
Nominee: John F. Kennedy

2) 1964
Democratic (incumbent)
Nominee: Lyndon Johnson

3) 1968
Democratic
Initial Frontrunner: Lyndon Johnson
2nd Frontrunner: Robert Kennedy
Nominee: Hubert Humphrey

4) 1972
Democratic
Initial Frontrunner: Edmund Muskie
Nominee: George McGovern

5) 1976
Democratic
Initial Frontrunner: open, Scoop Jackson
Nominee: Jimmy Carter

6) 1980
Democratic (incumbent)
Initial Frontrunner: Ted Kennedy
Nominee: Jimmy Carter

7) 1984
Democratic
Initial Frontrunner: John Glenn Walter Mondale
Nominee: Walter Mondale (barely)

8) 1988
Democratic
Initial Frontunners: Gary Hart
Mario Cuomo
Nominee: Michael Dukakis

9) 1992
Democratic
Initial Frontrunner: Mario Cuomo
Nominee: Bill Clinton

10) 1996
Democratic (incumbent)
Nominee: Bill Clinton

11) 2000
Democratic
Initial Frontrunner: Al Gore
Nominee: Al Gore

12) 2004
Democratic
Initial Frontrunners: Al Gore
John Kerry
Nominee: Probably Howard Dean
or Wesley Clark? Time
will tell.

Now the Republicans:

1960: Initial Frontrunner: Richard Nixon
Nominee: Richard Nixon

1964: Initial Frontrunner: Nelson Rockefeller
Nominee: Barry Goldwater

1968: Initial Frontrunners: George Romney, Nelson Rockefeller
Nominee: Richard Nixon

1972: incumbent -- nominee: Richard Nixon

1976: incumbent -- nominee: Gerald Ford (challenged by Reagan)

1980: Initial Frontrunner: Ronald Reagan
Nominee: Ronald Reagan

1984: incumbent -- nominee: Ronald Reagan

1988: Initial Frontrunner: George H.W. Bush
Nominee: George H.W. Bush

1992: incumbent -- George H.W. Bush

1996: Initial Frontrunner: Bob Dole
Nominee: Bob Dole

2000: Initial Frontrunner: George W. Bush
Nominee: George W. Bush

To sum it up, in only 2 out of 11 presidential races have the Republicans picked someone other than the initial frontrunner

As for the Democrats, we've picked someone other than the frontrunner 7 out of 11 presidential races, and almost all the open ones, exc. for 2000.

[brainshrub]

1. Excellent analysis. (nt)

[mumishka]

2. Initial frontrunner: Dean---- and guess who the winner will be

Surely even this den of Deanites would admit that Dean was the inital frontrunner. But now read Nicholas Kristof of the NY times and today's Times magazine etc etc. It is not over. And did you hear Hillary today: We're past being negative on the war. The question is how to solve both the problems in Iraq and here.

Yes, Kerry is crumbling but Clark is still out there. Or maybe Safire will be right and it will be Edwards who has the most coherent domestic policy and a wonderful book just out called Four Trials---which is a great Christmas gift for any democrat.

[liberalpragmatist]

3. Certainly there's time

But you can't deny that Dean's the frontrunner at present. That's all I'm saying. If he winds up the nominee or if Clark is the nominee, it'll be the most extreme example of this trend, since neither candidate (esp. Clark) was anywhere on the political radar just last fall. There's time that it's conceivable that Gephardt, Clark, Edwards, and, yes, even Kerry can still make it, but they all have their work cut out for them, and esp. for Gephardt and Kerry, it's gonna be tough -- doable but tough.

[OhioStateProgressive]

4. i hear voices calling across the land "Dennis!...Dennis!"

we will overcome the fake polls...and the true support shall be shown

[Jerseycoa]

10. In New Hampshire

Dean is clearly the frontrunner. In the rest of the states, where has he reached 30-40%? Or in a national poll? I'm asking, not arguing.

[lastliberalintexas]

7. Sorry, but Dean was not the initial frontrunner

John Kerry was, and this nomination was his to lose. I think you're a little off on your analysis there, since you started it on a false premise. :shrug:

[TheDonkey]

8. Kerry was not the initial front runner

Kerry was annointed "most likely to win" by the media but there was never a clear front-runner until Dean.

If you want to go by polls Gore and Liberman were the front runners in the start of the primary. This primary race has been too close to say it was Kerry's nominatino to lose!?

[lastliberalintexas]

9. Once Gore made it clear

that he wasn't running, Kerry became the Dems' favorite. Yes, Lieberman was probably leading most polls then, but we all know that was just name recognition. Kerry was seen by most people as the man to beat for the nomination. By then, I'd already switched to Dean (from Kerry), but I acknowledged that Kerry was the one- esp since Dean was at about 2% in the polls when I signed on.

And I did not mean to imply that his campaign is over, just that he is no longer the frontrunner. I wasn't bashing Kerry- I think he's a fine candidate and would make a good president.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. You couldn't be more wrong.

Initial frontrunner: John Kerry.

Even Kerry-ites won't dispute that. Dark horse: John Edwards. Dean was an unknown.

[w4rma]

13. Initial frontrunner was Lieberman. Second: Kerry. Third (final?) Dean. n/t

[ISUGRADIA]

5. The only time the "Frontrunner" status matters

is who's ahead right before the first race (Iowa or NH). If you look at that, most of the times that person had won. If Dean is ahaed before the IA Caucuses. it's likely he has the nomination sewn up.

Who the frontrunner is a year out really means nothing.

[no name no slogan]

11. Not necessarily

Johnson was the front-runner in New Hampshire in 1968-- Johnson actually WON the NH primary.

However, McCarthy got over 40% of the vote, which was perceived by almost everyone as an "upset", in what should have been a cakewalk for Johnson (an incumbent president, campaigning for a second full term).

McCarthy's showing in NH is what drove Johnson from the race, and made it possible for Humphrey AND Bobby Kennedy to join it.

If McCarthy had not shown so well in NH, it's doubtful that LBJ would have dropped out of the race, which means that neither HHH or RFK would have run in 1968.

[a_lil_wall_fly]

6. Wow....

This is the facts of historical trends and results within both parties.
So like the saying goes..DON'T COUNT THE CHICKENS BEFORE THEY HATCH!!!

Hence the importance of allowing the other candidate's supporters, other than the frontrunner; to speak thier thoughts of thier candidate as well.

'Cause you never know what will happen in the next 13 weeks.

The possiblity of anyone with anyone on the ticket is still available.

:D

:toast: to all the candidates and thier supporters

[SheilaT]

14. Exactly how are you defining frontrunner,

and at what point in the running?

I'd certainly argue with you that Gore was ever truly a frontrunner in the 2004 race. A lot of people kept on wishing he'd run, but their wishing doesn't make it so.

In 1992 I'm pretty sure Cuomo never officially ran -- I certainly remember my disappointment when he decided he was not an official candidate.

My point is, that this is a meaningless exercise.

[JaneQPublic]

16. True. And was Johnson ever really a candidate in 1968?

I recall his speech where he said he would not seek another term.

[helleborient]

17. Not an official candidate...

But he was on the ballot in New Hampshire and did poorly compared to expectations (49% to Eugene McCarthy's 42%)...then announced he would not run again.

[helleborient]

15. Interesting analysis, but I 'm curious...

How you identify initial frontrunner as well...

Jimmy Carter won the Iowa caucus in 1976 and Mario Cuomo was out of the running before Iowa ever took place in 1992.

[helleborient]

18. This is an interesting article about the importance of New Hampshire...

Note the date (August 2002) and at that point Howard Dean was little mroe than an asterisk in the campaign.

http://www.politicsnh.com/archives/pindell/august02/8_28_02.shtml