A reminder: Here’s who was winning the presidential race four, eight and 12 years ago today

[pinebox]

A friendly reminder, at this stage of the race, as history shows up multiple times, it's still anybody's game.

Here’s who was winning the presidential race four, eight and 12 years ago today
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/19/heres-who-was-winning-the-presidential-race-four-eight-and-12-years-ago-today/

[Renew Deal]

1. There were at least around 8 candidates in each of those races

It's harder to split up the vote with 3.

[brooklynite]

2. So your theory is: "it happened before"

I usually prefer to look at WHY it happened before. And when I look at 2008, I see that Barack Obama had strong political support, a large financial war-chest, a polished speaking style and a compelling story as the first serious Black Presidential candidate. I also see that Hillary Clinton was consistently at 40-45%, allowing Obama to rack up enough support to beat her. Which of those factors applies today?

[pinebox]

5. Can you show us where I said that?

Of course you can't because it was simply a PSA.

[brooklynite]

8. You point out that the leader in polls at this point is frequently not the nominee...

...I point out that, as far as the Democrats are concerned, the factors applicable to previous contests (especially 2008) aren't applicable today.

Feel free to show me where I'm wrong.

[pinebox]

11. You need to remember

that there is still a lot of time left in things though. Anything can happen and none of us have a crystal ball.
There's many factors involved, remember Dean? He was the front runner at one point too. For all we know, O'Malley in 3 months could be the go to guy. If we could all predict the future, we'd all be out buying lottery tickets.

[brooklynite]

16. Predict (v): foretell on the basis of observation, experience, or scientific reason

I CAN predict what will happen in the 2016 campaign, based on my OBSERVATION of the 2008 campaign and my OBSERVATION of the 2016 campaign polling and the respective campaign organizations, informed by my EXPERIENCE working in politics for 35+ years.

"Anything can happen" is a pretty week basis for making predictions.

[pinebox]

18. Sure

To quote Star Wars;
"Only a Sith believes in absolutes"

[sabrina 1]

28. Lol, that's what they said in 2008!

[Blue_Adept]

17. Considering your posting history here?

This isn't a PSA in the slightest.

But hey, every election every four years will always play out the same.

[olddots]

3. history regrets it's self

[leftofcool]

4. Sorry, Bernie is not Obama.

[pinebox]

6. Sorry but where did I say that?

It's funny how people see a simple PSA and automatically think "Sorry, Bernie is not Obama."
It's truly hilarious.

[berni_mccoy]

9. But Hillary is STILL the Senator from Wall Street. She's the same ol same ol.

And she's up to her usual dirty campaign tactics.

[sabrina 1]

29. No, he's better than Obama was at that time. And he's ahead of where Obama was because of that.

Obama's main reason for the support he got was his position on the Iraq War. That was my main reason for supporting him.

But on Wall St, on the corruption that brought down the economy, on Bush's surveillance policies, something which nearly caused me to stop supporting him, except Hillary was worse, Bernie is so much better. Not to mention Bernie's long record which Obama did not have.

But Obama ran on a progressive message, eg, he opposed Mandated Insurance for HC, another reason I supported him, Hillary was for it.

However, he quickly back tracked on that once elected. We've learned, a long record is important after all.

[Dem2]

7. Gonna have to be a killjoy and say it

Unless something dramatic comes out tarnishing Hillary, this cycle is likely different. The choices are few and Bernie has already had his "new exciting unknown" surge. I'd prefer a Bernie to a Hillary, but I don't see that changing at this point.

[Robbins]

12. well

why is it that people think Bush who is in single digets can still win GOP nomination but bernie is lost cause.

Nominate Clinton and you risk a Trump victory.

fixing the game for clinton and bashing bernie supports as racists and sexists isn't going to cauce enthusim for Clinton.

In 2004 and 2008 both kerry and obama won fair and square.not so this time.

[Juicy_Bellows]

24. Great point - why do people think Jeb is still viable?

You raise an excellent question - Jeb is still mentioned constantly but Bernie can't win. I don't quite get that.

[sabrina 1]

30. Because they will BUY it for Jeb. Benrie is winning it for himself! And it's scaring them

to death.

[Nonhlanhla]

27. Because no one has over 50% of the GOP's support right now

It seems to me that the Dem race is different from 2008. Then Hillary had under 50% of the support at this time, so all Obama had to do was to get undecideds and Edwards people over to his side. This time Hillary hovers around 60%, which means that Bernie would have to convince a sizeable number of her supporters to switch to him. This is possible, but I frankly don't see it happening, especially since a lot of her support come from African-Americans: with Obama many African Americans switched once it became clear that he had a real shot. They don't have the same connection with Bernie. Anything is possible, of course, but not everything is plausible.

The GOP race is different. They've got about a million people running for president, and both current front runners, who hover around 25-30% each (last time I checked) are flavor-of-the-month types who will most likely start losing support soon (esp. Carson). So Bush might still have a shot, although personally I don't think he does: I think the one who will step into the gaps since the GOP voters start getting a but more serious is Rubio.

My prediction, based on the scientific evidence of me pulling this out of my ... ear ... is that it will be Hillary vs. Rubio. And I think it will be an uphill battle.

[Metric System]

10. This article is from 3 months ago and Hillary is STILL in the lead presently.

[pinebox]

13. However

she was also at this stage in 2007, right? It's still anybody's race at this point and as I said above, for all we know, O'Malley could be the leader in 100 days. In elections, stranger things have happened.

[Hepburn]

19. It's deja vu all over again!

It ain't over until it's over.

[tammywammy]

20. There were also more candidates in the race at this point in 2007

There's no John Edwards left to drop out to give Bernie a big boost like Obama got.

[Turn CO Blue]

23. Edwards didn't drop out until March. But he was only at 4% at that point.

I was a huge supporter of his populist message at the time (later so sad to learn I had been duped as to the strength of his character -- that was a disappointment and I keep that in mind when trying to judge character).

Anyway, Edwards only had 4% of Dems for about a week before he dropped out. He never really broke 14-15%, even after a good line in that debate. But man, the hit pieces kept coming, and it turns out, rightly so.


Hillary got a 4% bump after Edwards dropped out - and Obama got about a 2% so I figure they evenly split, more going for Hillary at first.


|

|

[tammywammy]

25. Edwards suspended his campaign at the end of January 2008, not March.

Per your graph he was polling at 14% three days before he suspended his campaign. 14% was a lot for Obama and Hillary to split when they were only 12 points apart.

In a one week period from 27 Jan to 3 Feb Obama went +10 points and Clinton +3. Edwards dropping out was a boost to Obama.

[Turn CO Blue]

26. Yes, I meant Feb, but you are correct, he dropped out on Jan 30 not Feb

I didn't recall Edwards doing so well in Iowa - just looked it up and he was second with 29.75%. Wow. Even when he came in third he was pulling 17% of the vote in NH.

Edwards' advisors hinted on Feb 13, that Edwards was going to endorse Hillary. Because I did vaguely remember something like that. But Edwards met with Obama on Feb 17 - and Obama must have been persuasive.

And now I wonder how I ever supported Edwards over Obama, but live and learn.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Good catch

[zappaman]

15. ok. n/t

[DinahMoeHum]

21. Good point. "Fat Lady" doesn't start to sing until February 2016. . .

. . .when the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary voting starts.

[madfloridian]

22. My own personal view of our overwhelming polls right now....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128075009