How often do people like McCain/Howard Dean etc. run for president?

[wasteofo2]

Obviously, McCain and Dean are nothing alike in terms of attitude, policy, etc., but they're both very genuine people, and seem to have avoided truly becoming "politicians", and say what they really feel etc. So anyway, I wanted Dean to win, and was really just crushed when he didn't. Looking back on the Republican 2000 primaries, I'm horribly angry that McCain didn't win. So anyway, since I'm only 16 and don't exactly know much about people who lost in the primaries in the past, so I was wondering if it's relatively often that very genuine guys like McCain and Dean, who aren't afraid to truly speak their mind, and don't doublespeek/think like GWB run for president?

 

[Gokul43201]

Dean's burnt out...I don't think he has another chance. McCain has a good chance at a second shot, but I doubt he'll make the nomination (even with a Bush endorsement ??).

 

[kat]

well, without looking it up...I don't think it's often that if they lose in the primary's they get a chance at winning another primary. Although many of them continue to try every 4 years after every 4 years...
Dean may try running in the primary's again but I don't see him as ever being electable. I think that "very genuine" is a good trait but honestly neither of those guys have ever had a chance. Dean was TOO anti-war and too angry to appeal to the wide variety of people he would have had to in order to become president. McCain has other issues that I don't think will ever allow him to get enough support to win a presidential election.

 

[BobG]

To be honest, while a two-party system for Congress may make government run more efficiently, two parties are really insufficient to reflect the different political views of over 250 million people. The nomination process winds up weeding out candidates who would be offensive to the greatest number of people than finding candidates that appeal to the greatest number of people.

Until very recent times (or maybe Ford was a special case due to the circumstances of Nixon's departure), vice presidents taking over for dead presidents have been a little more likely to produce effective results than elected presidents.

One example: while Kennedy made a lot of statements about civil rights, his efforts rarely extended past talking about it - it was Johnson who pounded through 'Kennedy's vision' using Kennedy's name as a hammer. While Johnson was a good behind the scenes bargainer, he would have turned off too many voters to win election as a challenger.

 

[BobG]

well, without looking it up...I don't think it's often that if they lose in the primary's they get a chance at winning another primary. Although many of them continue to try every 4 years after every 4 years...
Dean may try running in the primary's again but I don't see him as ever being electable. I think that "very genuine" is a good trait but honestly neither of those guys have ever had a chance. Dean was TOO anti-war and too angry to appeal to the wide variety of people he would have had to in order to become president. McCain has other issues that I don't think will ever allow him to get enough support to win a presidential election.

Reagan challenged Nixon in '68 and Ford in '76. Bush challenged Reagan in '80. Nixon lost so many elections he gave up politics in the mid 60's telling the public "You won't have Nixon to kick around, anymore", then made a comeback and won the presidential election of '68.

 

[wasteofo2]

Just to clarify, I wasn't talking about people like Dean running again (though I think McCain will likely run in 2008 if Bush wins this time), but just new people popping up out of nowhere, like Dean did (Governor from Vermont, who saw that coming?).

And what's up with this Bob Kerrey guy, why do so many people like him?

 

[wasteofo2]

Until very recent times (or maybe Ford was a special case due to the circumstances of Nixon's departure), vice presidents taking over for dead presidents have been a little more likely to produce effective results than elected presidents.

One example: while Kennedy made a lot of statements about civil rights, his efforts rarely extended past talking about it - it was Johnson who pounded through 'Kennedy's vision' using Kennedy's name as a hammer. While Johnson was a good behind the scenes bargainer, he would have turned off too many voters to win election as a challenger.

Oy vey, let's hope Bush never dies in office...

 

[Gokul43201]

I still don't see what's the big deal with Dean's "eeeyaaah" speech. Is that really what turned most people off him ??

 

[wasteofo2]

I still don't see what's the big deal with Dean's "eeeyaaah" speech. Is that really what turned most people off him ??

I do believe so.

He lost in Iowa because him and Gephardt were in a furious negative-ad war, and that turned the Iowa people off to both of them. Kerry seemed like a real politician, who knew what he was doing, and Edwards ran a strictly positive campaign, though didn't seem as presidential. Dean (if I recall correctly), only lost New Hampshire by a little bit, and probabally would have won it, and the nomination, if not for that speech.

I don't think it was so much the fact that he screamed, but the way the media constantly played it over and over and over and over and over, combined with the Republican thought control machine insisting that this scream was the dead giveaway that he was totally horrible as a person, regardless of how loud the cheers in the room were.

 

[wasteofo2]

So no one can answer the question?

I'll re-state it: How often is it that people who don't necessarily tow the party line/people who are really genuine run for president?

 

[kat]

So no one can answer the question?

I'll re-state it: How often is it that people who don't necessarily tow the party line/people who are really genuine run for president?

NEVER!

 

[wasteofo2]

NEVER!

Bollocks, looks like I'll have to go found my own country then...

 

[selfAdjoint]

Obviously, McCain and Dean are nothing alike in terms of attitude, policy, etc., but they're both very genuine people, and seem to have avoided truly becoming "politicians", and say what they really feel etc. So anyway, I wanted Dean to win, and was really just crushed when he didn't. Looking back on the Republican 2000 primaries, I'm horribly angry that McCain didn't win. So anyway, since I'm only 16 and don't exactly know much about people who lost in the primaries in the past, so I was wondering if it's relatively often that very genuine guys like McCain and Dean, who aren't afraid to truly speak their mind, and don't doublespeek/think like GWB run for president?

About once every twenty or thirty years. I assume you mean a challenger from within a major party who wants to move the party in a different direction. There have been liberal republicans like Nelson Rockefeller and conservative democrats like Orville Faubus.

 

[Mercator]

Waste of O2, very rarely indeed and I guess it is because of one of the weaknesses in our democratic system. If you see the issues that are dominating the election debate in the US at this moment it is clear: because a majority of people obviously are not able to grasp the important aspects of the political agendas (economy, security, foreign policy...) they concentrate on trivial details. A small mistake like Deans' eeeyyaaa cost him the nomination. I really get the feeling that to save democracies (and not only in the US), we have to some how get rid of the show element in elections. Trivialities should play no role in one's choice of the candidate. The only way I can think of is that in each election (and also the nomination round), each candidate presents his views on a list of important issues. The voting will then be on the issues, and not on the person. This would complicate the process of course, but would perhaps also have the side benefit that people mainly interested in the candidate's hairstyle would not bother to vote anymore, since they would be forced to think.

 

[JohnDubYa]

McCain and Dean won't win for the same reason Madonna outsold Nina Hagen. The People want vanilla.

 

[Mercator]

McCain and Dean won't win for the same reason Madonna outsold Nina Hagen. The People want vanilla.

Isn't the show business big enough? Can't the system make sure that in politics show business plays as little a role as possible? In this respect I appreciate Bush much more than Kerry. Who knows what this man thinks? At least with Bush it's clear (except for a few lapsi )

 

[wasteofo2]

So selfAdjoint, was it just a freak coincidence that McCain ran in 2000 and Dean in 2004, and I shouldn't expect anyone that genuine to come about again for a good few decades? If so, that's really sad.

But wait, would you consider Hillary Clinton a genuine person?

Isn't the show business big enough? Can't the system make sure that in politics show business plays as little a role as possible? In this respect I appreciate Bush much more than Kerry. Who knows what this man thinks? At least with Bush it's clear (except for a few lapsi )

Funny, knowing exactly what Bush thinks is the reason I can't appreciate anything about him , but that's not really what this threads about.

 

[russ_watters]

I missed this thread - short answer is "not enough." But the long answer is that the parties simply won't allow free-thinkers to succeed. McCain doesn't toe the party line and because of that, the RNC put the full force of their money behind Bush in 2000. JD, the people do not want vanilla - McCain would have beaten Gore in a landslide - they get it because the parties want vanilla.

 

[JohnDubYa]

I see your point. You may be right.

But wait, would you consider Hillary Clinton a genuine person?

A genuine WHAT? Slime ball? Yeah, she's the real deal.

 

[wasteofo2]

I see your point. You may be right.



A genuine WHAT? Slime ball? Yeah, she's the real deal.

Forget I asked that in this thread

I'm interested in knowing what ya'll think about Hillary though, but just voice it in this thread https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=43933

 

[JohnDubYa]

Have I made my views clear, or do I need to elaborate? :)

 

[selfAdjoint]

John, what the hell difference does your private opinion, or mine, make? Is this whole forum just a venue for spouting?