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.
No. The Democratic list of contenders wasn't long at all.
At first, it was Clinton, O'Malley, Chafee, Webb, and Lessig. That's less than the average number of starters for either party. Bernie entered the race after 3 had already quit.
Of those early 3, only O'Malley had any name recognition. That's largely why Clinton settled in as the top contender so early and so soon.
It was a lot like the GOP's situation in 2008. In 2007, their field was small, and McCain had a lot of name recognition. By early 2008, McCain was the only guy left in the field.
Only Romney was as well known, possibly. Huckabee wasn't back then, and neither was Ron Paul. Once they dropped out, McCain had the field to himself, even when Paul continued. Paul was like Bernie in 2016.
there was 6... that is a long list for a shoe-win
Clinton entered first...2nd was Bernie....there was also a draft for a 7th (Elizabeth warren)but she decided to run for senate instead
the current dem list is ~22 (not sure who has officially dropped, I know a few have)
Even though there were people clearly far more qualified?
It would be funny if Democrats had fallen into that same trap and ended up with Marianne Williamson.
That's fine. She's one of the people I was thinking of voting for although I probably will be the only one voting because I'm forever in the minority so I guess that's bad when you think about it.
Trump was the only one that could have beat Hillary.
Actually he had the best chance of losing, and actually did end up losing the popular vote. Any other candidate would have had an easier time to beat her.
It is too bad GOP voters do not stick by their principles when they vote. If they did, we'd have conservative presidents, not neo-cons and big-spending populist idiots.
Rand Paul was the best choice, and I think he should challenge Trump next year, but it seems GOP is too afraid to have anyone challenge him/
The biggest surprise for me was how Jeb Bush lost. I think it was the illegal immigration topic that cost Jeb the race; being the sole candidate with an anti-immigration platform pushed DT to the top of the heap. He successfully tapped into a deep vein of xenophobia, whereas Dubya won on a pro-Latinxyz policy and Jeb probably figured he could follow suit. The great recession may have exacerbated that anti-illegal movement; perhaps from the competition for jobs.
The biggest surprise for me was how Jeb Bush lost. I think it was the illegal immigration topic that cost Jeb the race; being the sole candidate with an anti-immigration platform pushed DT to the top of the heap. He successfully tapped into a deep vein of xenophobia, whereas Dubya won on a pro-Latinxyz policy and Jeb probably figured he could follow suit. The great recession may have exacerbated that anti-illegal movement; perhaps from the competition for jobs.
Even though there were people clearly far more qualified?
It would be funny if Democrats had fallen into that same trap and ended up with Marianne Williamson.
We got Trump because no one wanted Hillary. Or any of the other pack of idiots the left offered.
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.
