A lot of people have been discussing the prospects of Hillary Clinton becoming President of the United States by running in some future election. It’s possible, of course, but people should remember that my Party in general prefers to nominate people who are running for the first time. We nominated Barack Obama on his first go, and we nominated John Kerry on his first go. We did nominate Al Gore on his second, but before that we nominated Bill Clinton on his first, and Michael Dukakis on his first, and Walter Mondale on his first, and Jimmy Carter on his first. And George McGovern on his second, but I count the modern primary-based nomination process as starting in 1976. Still, if you count George McGovern, rather than one out of the last seven, you’ve got two out of the last eleven, as none of Hubert Humphrey, Lyndon Johnson or John Kennedy had unsuccessful runs before gaining the nomination. Nor had Adlai Stevenson run for the nomination without getting it, nor Harry S. Truman, nor Franklin D. Roosevelt.
The Republican Party, by contrast, prefers to choose candidates that have unsuccessful runs at the Presidential nomination under their belts. John McCain, of course, ran unsuccessfully in 2000. George W. Bush was a first-timer, but Bob Dole had run unsuccessfully in 1980, as had George H.W. Bush. Ronald Reagan, of course, ran unsuccessfully in 1968 and in 1976. So that’s one out of the last five. Gerald Ford never ran unsuccessfully for the nomination, nor did Richard Nixon (although, like Adlai Stevenson on our side, he had failed as the nominee before), nor Dwight Eisenhower; the run does not go back so far on their side.
Still, going back to 1976 (which, as I say, I count as the beginning of the modern era in Presidential Party politics), the Republicans have only once chosen a non-incumbent who had not come before them as a challenger for the nomination, and the Democrats have only one chose a contender who has.
Of course, arguing from recent trends shouldn’t really persuade people, as the trends will end sometime, and why not now? On the other hand, I suspect that it would be very difficult for Senator Clinton to get the nomination of my party in the future.
Tolerabimus quod tolerare debemus,
-Vardibidian.
Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, would be perfectly poised for another run.
Perhaps she’ll run as a Republican?
peace
Matt
To show that this trend reflects the inclinations of Democratic voters and not either the inclinations of Democratic candidates or patterns of choices about Vic-Presidents or the vagaries of the Presidential election schedule, you would need to show “first-timers” being selected by Democratic voters ahead of “return” candidates in the primaries. That happened in this year’s primary, of course, with voters preferring both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to John Edwards, but how many candidates have made multiple tries? There was Gary Hart back in the 1980s: he ran in 1984 and 1988, didn’t he?
It’s clear that the Democratic Party has followed a different pattern than the Republican Party has, but I’m not sure that the cause of this pattern is Democratic voters’ preference for first-timers.
Well, this year there were also Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich, and last time around there was Dick Gephardt and, um, trying to remember. Had Al Sharpton run before?. Anyway, in 1992 there was Jerry Brown, and in 1988 there were Jesse Jackson and Gary Hart. In 1984 (Walter Mondale’s year), the candidates were all new, I think, but in 1976, Jimmy Carter beat Scoop Jackson and George Wallace, who had both run in 1972.
However, I think that an established record of Party preference for “fresh faces” would affect both the inclination of strong candidates to run again and the likelihood of those second-timers winning the early institutional support that is (or perhaps used to be) so essential to winning the nomination. Or not; it’s hard for me to see the strong candidates that chose not to run after running second or third in a primary. Ted Kennedy? Howard Dean? From, fr’ex, 1988, Gary Hart and Jesse Jackson were both old-timers, and Joe Biden, Dick Gephardt and Al Gore all would run again later. From 1992, Tom Harkin is the only candidate that stands out as having decided not to run again, as Paul Tsongas didn’t have the chance. Bob Kerrey, I suppose.
Thanks,
-V.
Well, there certainly are lots of examples. I suppose I forgot (if I ever knew) about many of these multiple campaigners because many of them never _seriously_ contended for the nomination. I am more persuaded that newness is an advantage in Democratic Presidential primaries than I was. However, the question of whether the _strong_ finishers chose to run again or not still seems interesting.
McCain was a serious challenger for Bush in 2000. Bush, Sr. was a serious challenger for Reagan in 2000.
Reagan was a serious challenger for Ford in 1976.
Making a good showing seems not unconnected to their later successful bids.
It’d be interesting to compare what the second- and third-place finishers in the two parties’ primaries did subsequent to losing the contest for the nomination.
Well, and in a general way, that’s the point: the Republicans tend to pick the guy who finished second last time around. The Democrats, on the whole, don’t.
Of course, it’s not always easy to determine who was second. Was Mitt Romney second, or Mike Huckabee? In 1992, was Jerry Brown second, or Paul Tsongas? But let’s see: after 1976, Scoop Jackson didn’t run again. After 1980, Teddy Kennedy didn’t run again. After 1984, Gary Hart ran again but lost (he is an exception in many ways). After 1988, I don’t know who was the runner-up. Al Gore? Jesse Jackson? Dick Gephardt? Well, call it Al Gore, who is our sole exception. After 1992, the second place was either Paul Tsongas or Jerry Brown, depending on how you count, neither of whom ran again. After 2000, Bill Bradley did not run again. After 2004, Howard Dean did not run again, but John Edwards did (and lost).
For the Republicans, the exception is that the 1996 runners up (Steve Forbes, Pat Buchanan and Lamar Alexander) weren’t serious contenders the next time around. Both Mr. Forbes and Mr. Alexander made abortive attempts, and Pat Buchanan went to the Reform Party. I have to assume that Mr. Forbes’ total lack of elective experience (plus his essential creepiness and the whole father thing) ruled him out, but I don’t really understand why Lamar! and the shirt didn’t get more traction.
Thanks,
-V.
could be a media preference too. edwards and biden beaten with sticks the press had in its attic.