Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Since 1972,when a party has let their primary go until the convention,they've lost 100% of the time

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:38 PM
Original message
Since 1972,when a party has let their primary go until the convention,they've lost 100% of the time
From mydd.com

Is It A Problem If The Democratic Primary Goes To The Convention?
by J Ro, Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 06:56:23 PM EST

The Democratic primary season continues on without a nominee in sight, while Republicans have a nominee in John McCain. Most people I've talked to are split on whether a long primary season for the Democrats will hurt the eventual nominee's chances in the general.

On the one hand, there are those that believe that a vigorous internal debate within the Democratic party - with more primary voters getting a chance to weigh in - will strengthen the party as a whole. And of course, as kos pointed out, the continued primary makes it hard for John McCain to get any press.

On the other hand, while Clinton and Obama spend millions on media attacking each other, McCain can quietly consolidate the Republican base, plan his campaign, fundraise, and get his ground game started. When we do have a nominee, they will be starting off weeks or months behind.

Of course, I'm not comfortable calling for either candidate to withdraw before they have locked up the nomination, but the question of whether a drawn-out primary is good for the Democratic party is an important one. To get some perspective, I examined the primaries of both parties for Presidential elections going back to 1972. I was specifically looking for information on when candidates from each party locked up their respective nominations and how they fared in the general election afterwards.

Using Wikipedia and FEC sources, here's what I found:

check out the data here: http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/8/185623/3188

Obviously there are a ton of factors that go into elections. It's impossible to say any correlation noticed in the above chart means those factors caused a specific outcome. And while it's hard to divine any specific pattern with respect to when each party locks up their respective nominations and its effect on the general, one thing is clear: Since 1972, when a party has let their primary go on until the convention, they have lost 100% of the time. Even when the primary was relatively open on both sides with no incumbent running - as it 1976 and 1988 - the party that let their fight go on until the convention lost.

I fall into the pro-democracy camp. I think it's good that more people get to participate in the process. Indeed, they've responded to that opportunity with enthusiasm - turnout numbers are off the charts. I feel good about the primary process continuing - even though personally I'm getting sick of the media coverage. However, I'm not OK with this thing going until the convention. If history is our guide, we'll be at a distinct disadvantage if we don't have a nominee by the time the party convenes this summer.

Hopefully, we as a party will find a way to end this process before then. Otherwise, I'd be worried.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. Oh dear.
:scared:

Thank god you are here to warn us! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. LULA MAY, CAN YOU ANSWER A QUESTION
when you are done spamming this article everywhere?

What did you think about the number of states that Obama outperformed Hillary vs. the number of states that Hillary outperformed Obama in those SUSA polls released a few days ago?

THANK YOU. YOU CAN NOW RESUME POSTING IN ALL CAPS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbinacan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. You can bet that
if HRC wins PA., it's going to the convention. Hell, it might even if she loses. Not good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
4. All the more reason for Hillary to drop out while she still has some pride left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. What if we look at this with a different slant?
There have been 9 elections since 1972.

On three occasions, the conventions played a role:

1976 - Carter vs Ford

1980 - Carter vs. Reagan

1988 - Dukakis vs. Bush

I lived through these elections and I don't think the fact that the decision for the eventual loser was made at the convention really had much to do with the eventual outcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-08-08 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
7. Clinton 92 sealed in April. Why does she keep saying it was an open race through June?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 19th 2014, 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC