Mark Shields: only twice have Dems nominated the early front-runner

[Mairead]

Let's look at the record. Only twice in the last 44 years has the Democratic nominee for president emerged in the year before the election as the clear front-runner in the Gallup Poll: Former Vice President Walter Mondale in 1984 and then-Vice President Al Gore in 2000. By contrast, every other eventual Democratic presidential candidate since (with the obvious exception of uncontested incumbent President Bill Clinton in 1996) has trailed -- often badly -- in surveys the year before the election.

http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=msh

[VermontDem2004]

1. Interesting

In August 1991, the Arkansas governor was running fifth with 11 percent, badly trailing New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, U.S. Sen. Lloyd Bentsen of Texas and former California Gov. Jerry Brown.

[LuminousX]

2. Interesting

but pointless.

Does this mean that the front runner right now drop out because the chances are against him?

[VermontDem2004]

3. Well no

because Gore and Dukakis got the Nom.

[kwolf68]

7. NO

It means the followers of said "front runner" better keep things in perspective.

[LuminousX]

8. So this was meant as a message to the supporters of Front Runners...

If being the front runner was such a sure thing, I don't think we'd even have to have the primaries.

I don't put much credence to things like this. Every election is different. The eagerness to find a trend and thus predictive power over the election is today's phrenology - it will be mocked by our descendents.

The only thing 'trendspotting' like this is good for is for writing record books.

[AP]

17. It also means that if your argument AGAINST a candidate is that he or she

is trailing today, you better come up with a more coherent theory which explains why the candidate won't catch up and which takes into account history and facts (other than, merely, the candidate is trailing).

[VoteClark]

4. The reason that Clinton was trailing in August of 1992 was simple

He was not in to race until October.

Clark is ranking 4th on the internet.

Dean
Kerry
Kucinich
Clark

He has not entered the race yet.
You also have to look at money. Dean has spent more than any of the others. So naturally, he should be ahead. But I do have to hand it to Dean, he is doing an excellent job campaigning on the internet and in meet-ups. However, I look at him more as a movement than a candidate. Dean supporters might be able to make a great deal of noise, however, I don't think the majority of Democrats will ever back Dean. They will go for someone like Lieberman, Kerry, or Clark.

:kick:
J4Clark

[VermontDem2004]

5. Lieberman

you mean the guy who got booed at the California Democrat Convention, the Lieberman who got booed at the AFL CIO forum, you mean the Lieberman who got booed in Oklahoma? Is this the guy the majority of the Democrats will back? Dean '04. Actually Bill Clinton started campaigning in the middle of August 1991, he officially announced his candidacy on October 3, 1991 at the Old State House in Little Rock, Arkansas. Dean started campaigning in December 2002, but haven't officially announced his candidacy to till June of 2003.

[AP]

20. Edwards is officialy announcing next month.

The real date you need to look at is the filing date with the FEC. I think I remember reading that many Dem candidates (including Clinton?) file on the same day that JFK filed (Jan 1st?) for symbolic reasons.

There's an article in, I believe, yesterday's Raleigh Observer explaining that the announcement of candidacy is just a ceremonial thing the canididates do even though they've been campaigning in earnest for months. It talks about how Edwards is having his in Robbins next month.

[On the Road]

6. Yes, But Dean Does Not Fit the Pattern of the Early Front-Runner

Mondale and Gore had name recognition, influential positions, and were odds-on favorites before any candidates formally announced.

A better question is: once a lesser-known candidate emerges from the pack and takes the lead, what are the odds of his losing the nomination? Carter and Dukakis for example, came from nowhere to take the lead and never relinquished it.

The only recent one who didn't is Gary Hart in 1988. And I believe a scandal or major misstep by Dean is the only thing that will keep him from the nomination.

[tjdee]

9. Um, Dean was the chair of the National Governors Association.

Is the chair of the National Governors Association not an influential position? I don't know why some people act like Dean was out doctoring in Fargo or something before this. He was the chair of the NGA, AND before that chair of the Dem Governor's Association, AND at some point also chair New England Governor's Association. AND he was a member of the DLC, and was laying tracks in Iowa while he was still governor.

Come ON, LOL.

He's not as much of an outsider as some continually make him out to be.

[CMT]

10. Dean is not the early front runner

actually Lieberman has been but Dean is gaining steadily.

[JaneQPublic]

12. Beeeeep. We have a winner!

That's correct. Lieberman has been the front-runner for months, and still is in most polls. Dean, on the other hand, has only become a first-tier candidate in the last couple of months. Check out the numbers:

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04dem.htm

Consequently, Dean's situation more closely parallels Clinton's in 1992, While Lieberman's is closer to Mario Cuomo's in that same year.

[NewJerseyDem]

16. No

Lieberman may have been winning in the polls but everyone knew that that was just because of name recognition and that he would fall in the polls later on when people got to know the other candidates. Kerry was the early front runner because he was the favorite according to most people. The polls don't really matter that much.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

11. Is there an early front-runner?

Is there an early front-runner? The national polls (which are basically meaningless for the primaries if you ask me) say one thing, but certainly don't show a clear front-runner.

Here on DU it seems like Dean and Kerry have the most support, followed by Kucinich.

Seems too muddled at this point to say who the front-runner is.

[jiacinto]

13. Ignore conventional wisdom

Over the last few electino cycles "conventional wisdom" has been proven wrong. Dean is doing well but he is by no means guaranteed the nomination.

[poskonig]

14. Perhaps Clark will be the insurgent.

Clark joins, Kerry and Gephardt wither away, and we get a Dean/Clark battle.

[Sinistrous]

15. Or, a Dean / Clark or Clark / Dean Team.

Probably this is the kiss of death -- my "dream teams" have a way of never forming.

[Bread and Circus]

18. Gives more of a basis for the Clark run

Yeah, I strongly believe the field is
wide open. Clark may be the guy who
surprises us all.

[mandyky]

19. Front runner is a bogus term

invented by the media, according to polls, etc. As far as I am concerned, noone will be a frontrunner until we are at least 1/2 way thru the primaries.
Personally I think Dean is the frontrunner so far, but we are kinda far out to assume it will remain that way.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

21. There are hundreds of instances where the candidates that

were polling near the bottom, stayed near the bottom. The front-runners who didn't win the nomination likely finished 2nd or 3rd.

As another poster said: phrenology.