Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have a pretty good history of electing presidents who didn't have a chance. I recall watching media coverage of Reagan in the 1976 GOP primary that dismissed him as a lunatic fringe ultraconservative. 4 years later he was prez. In 1992 I remember the disbelief from the right when Bill Clinton won. There was a bumper sticker that went something like, 'we elected a draft-dodging, pot smoking governor from a non industrialized state...is that what we just did?" Then in 2000 nobody really knew much about W Bush but he shot up in GOP primary polls because people were confusing him with his father.
Likewise prior to 2008 few would have given Barack Obama, whose name rhymed with Osama, any chance. He was a little-known state Senator. But he wound up as a 2 term POTUS.
Reagan was governor of the most populated state. Clinton was a popular Democratic governor in a southern state, Obama was a US Senator and George W. Bush's father had been President and Vice-President (and a member of the House, and CIA director) and he came from one of America's political dynasty families.
Ben Carson is a guy who would quite literally be the least experienced person ever to be President of the United States after 8 years of attacking a guy for lacking experience among other things.
All but three Presidents (Taylor, Grant, Eisenhower) have had at least some political experience before becoming President. All three of them had been high ranking Army officers that held at least command of a field army and two of them (Grant, Eisenhower) were the highest ranking officers in the Army. All three of them were hugely popular war heroes.
I don't believe for one second that major Republican money is going to line up behind the novice Carson in the amounts he would need to win the GOP nomination.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,555 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6040
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz
We have a pretty good history of electing presidents who didn't have a chance. I recall watching media coverage of Reagan in the 1976 GOP primary that dismissed him as a lunatic fringe ultraconservative. 4 years later he was prez. In 1992 I remember the disbelief from the right when Bill Clinton won. There was a bumper sticker that went something like, 'we elected a draft-dodging, pot smoking governor from a non industrialized state...is that what we just did?" Then in 2000 nobody really knew much about W Bush but he shot up in GOP primary polls because people were confusing him with his father.
Likewise prior to 2008 few would have given Barack Obama, whose name rhymed with Osama, any chance. He was a little-known state Senator. But he wound up as a 2 term POTUS.
not sure if that was a typo or if its like the community Organizer comment... but Barack Obama was a United States' Senator when he ran for President.
Its also a false narrative to use Reagan because he actually did lose when he ran the first time.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,555 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6040
Quote:
Originally Posted by Votre_Chef
Reagan was governor of the most populated state. Clinton was a popular Democratic governor in a southern state, Obama was a US Senator and George W. Bush's father had been President and Vice-President (and a member of the House, and CIA director) and he came from one of America's political dynasty families.
Ben Carson is a guy who would quite literally be the least experienced person ever to be President of the United States after 8 years of attacking a guy for lacking experience among other things.
All but three Presidents (Taylor, Grant, Eisenhower) have had at least some political experience before becoming President. All three of them had been high ranking Army officers that held at least command of a field army and two of them (Grant, Eisenhower) were the highest ranking officers in the Army. All three of them were hugely popular war heroes.
I don't believe for one second that major Republican money is going to line up behind the novice Carson in the amounts he would need to win the GOP nomination.
We have a pretty good history of electing presidents who didn't have a chance. I recall watching media coverage of Reagan in the 1976 GOP primary that dismissed him as a lunatic fringe ultraconservative. 4 years later he was prez. In 1992 I remember the disbelief from the right when Bill Clinton won. There was a bumper sticker that went something like, 'we elected a draft-dodging, pot smoking governor from a non industrialized state...is that what we just did?" Then in 2000 nobody really knew much about W Bush but he shot up in GOP primary polls because people were confusing him with his father.
Likewise prior to 2008 few would have given Barack Obama, whose name rhymed with Osama, any chance. He was a little-known state Senator. But he wound up as a 2 term POTUS.
Reagan ushered in the present era of charisma over everything else. Clinton, Bush and Obama all won because of their charm, quick wits and personalities over their abilities and/or their records.
In 1992, Bill Clinton was still trailing Paul Tsongas by a ways in the primary; he had a couple of recent wins to close the gap some, but when he appeared on the Arsenio Hall late-nigh show, and played a hot solo on his saxophone, Americans got a blast of charisma from him for the first time, and that appearance put him on top of the following primaries.
Reagan knew he had charisma, and he used it well for 4 years after his primary defeat in 1976. He had a daily talk show on one of the radio networks at noon, and knew how to sell the goods on the radio.
In those pre-Rush years, Reagan had a wide-open field of the radio audience when working folks were listening to the radio while eating lunch.
That radio show turned his image around after being thought of as a has-been actor and an unpopular former Governor.
… and ever since, the voters have always gone for the candidate with the most glamor of some kind. After Reagan, voters elected the best-looking nominee, most charming nominee, and all the nominee had to do was give some good speeches (or play the sax), and the first term was in the pocket. So far, the 21st century has not seen a one-term President, and I don't think glamor over substance will lose for a long time to come.
Reagan ushered in the present era of charisma over everything else. Clinton, Bush and Obama all won because of their charm, quick wits and personalities over their abilities and/or their records.
In 1992, Bill Clinton was still trailing Paul Tsongas by a ways in the primary; he had a couple of recent wins to close the gap some, but when he appeared on the Arsenio Hall late-nigh show, and played a hot solo on his saxophone, Americans got a blast of charisma from him for the first time, and that appearance put him on top of the following primaries.
Reagan knew he had charisma, and he used it well for 4 years after his primary defeat in 1976. He had a daily talk show on one of the radio networks at noon, and knew how to sell the goods on the radio.
In those pre-Rush years, Reagan had a wide-open field of the radio audience when working folks were listening to the radio while eating lunch.
That radio show turned his image around after being thought of as a has-been actor and an unpopular former Governor.
… and ever since, the voters have always gone for the candidate with the most glamor of some kind. After Reagan, voters elected the best-looking nominee, most charming nominee, and all the nominee had to do was give some good speeches (or play the sax), and the first term was in the pocket. So far, the 21st century has not seen a one-term President, and I don't think glamor over substance will lose for a long time to come.
Uh; you forgot JFK there. Tho he was before my time; the word was HIS and Jackie's "looks" def helped him win the POTUS in 1960 over Nixon.
Uh; you forgot JFK there. Tho he was before my time; the word was HIS and Jackie's "looks" def helped him win the POTUS in 1960 over Nixon.
I have always thought JFKs charm and appeal helped elect Obama. The people, especially the young 20somethings saw another JFK in Obama; charm, young, family man, different, and fresh. They had only heard about Kennedy, really knew nothing about him but thought they would get someone like him, so they campaigned and voted. That along with the high % of black votes Obama got is why we have him now: of course the Rs didn't do a great job of choosing opponents either.
I have always thought JFKs charm and appeal helped elect Obama. The people, especially the young 20somethings saw another JFK in Obama; charm, young, family man, different, and fresh. They had only heard about Kennedy, really knew nothing about him but thought they would get someone like him, so they campaigned and voted. That along with the high % of black votes Obama got is why we have him now: of course the Rs didn't do a great job of choosing opponents either.
You could well be right. Kennedy is still remembered, but folks have forgotten how close that election was. While Nixon and Kennedy had similar Congressional experience, as VP, Nixon had a lot of visibility as Eisenhower's point man, and was much better known.
And Nixon was never universally admired. He was always a controversial figure from the first.
In a lot of ways 2008 paralleled 1960. John McCain had a lot of controversy swirl around him, and he was also better known.
What is mostly forgotten now is the Kennedy-Nixon debate on TV. That was the very first time huge numbers of voters were able to see the candidates go face to face. None of the issues that were debated ever amounted to much, but the voters got to see Kennedy's sunny self-confidence for the first time, and I believe that alone was what started is wide appeal and the entire Camelot thing.
Candidates like Kennedy, Reagan and Obama are very rare. I think it will be a very long time before we see another like them, and I think they can't come from a party search or anything like that. They just show up, and can't be planned for in advance.
You could well be right. Kennedy is still remembered, but folks have forgotten how close that election was. While Nixon and Kennedy had similar Congressional experience, as VP, Nixon had a lot of visibility as Eisenhower's point man, and was much better known.
And Nixon was never universally admired. He was always a controversial figure from the first.
In a lot of ways 2008 paralleled 1960. John McCain had a lot of controversy swirl around him, and he was also better known.
What is mostly forgotten now is the Kennedy-Nixon debate on TV. That was the very first time huge numbers of voters were able to see the candidates go face to face. None of the issues that were debated ever amounted to much, but the voters got to see Kennedy's sunny self-confidence for the first time, and I believe that alone was what started is wide appeal and the entire Camelot thing.
Candidates like Kennedy, Reagan and Obama are very rare. I think it will be a very long time before we see another like them, and I think they can't come from a party search or anything like that. They just show up, and can't be planned for in advance.
You could well be right. Kennedy is still remembered, but folks have forgotten how close that election was. While Nixon and Kennedy had similar Congressional experience, as VP, Nixon had a lot of visibility as Eisenhower's point man, and was much better known.
And Nixon was never universally admired. He was always a controversial figure from the first.
In a lot of ways 2008 paralleled 1960. John McCain had a lot of controversy swirl around him, and he was also better known.
What is mostly forgotten now is the Kennedy-Nixon debate on TV. That was the very first time huge numbers of voters were able to see the candidates go face to face. None of the issues that were debated ever amounted to much, but the voters got to see Kennedy's sunny self-confidence for the first time, and I believe that alone was what started is wide appeal and the entire Camelot thing.
Candidates like Kennedy, Reagan and Obama are very rare. I think it will be a very long time before we see another like them, and I think they can't come from a party search or anything like that. They just show up, and can't be planned for in advance.
I totally agree with you about the 3 you mention. We have to stop looking for another Reagan or Kennedy. I think many are thinking, because we elected a black President the next step will be a woman and many assume that will be Hillary.
As for Nixon, as a staunch Republican and a native Californian I supported him full force, but down deep I never did like him and he had less personality than the spider I killed in the bathroom a few minutes ago.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
