It's not a real campaign until you have donors...
The time honored caucus season has its moments and none is a better
indicator that things are off and running than a bunch of donors trying
to encourage a candidate to run.
(Photo credit of Candidate Biden doling out Shoulder rubs to an Iowan voter courtesy of iagreetosee.com)
Lest you think, it's too early, Joe Biden already has courters. Two Quad City men lead a group called Time For Biden and expect to have a Headquarters up and running by March 2018.
Now, granted, way more candidates are losers than winners in Presidential Elections. Still, it seems the ones that are courted the most are the biggest failures.
Arguably, the heaviest courted candidate before caucus was Chris Christie in 2016. He eventually ended up with less than 2 percent of the vote that year.
Remember Scott Walker's Presidential run? No? He was also heavily courted but didn't even make it to the caucus.
You can probably line up several heavy hitters: Rick Perry, Fred Thompson, Jeb Bush, Wesley Clark. of course, you can probably find a list of reasons why these campaigns crashed on landing. Still, it's not easy as it sounds. Thompson and Clark probably waited too long to enter, so no worry there.
Still, the Ridin' with Biden movement is getting some noise from Iowa Democrats. Iowa Governor Terry Branstad was named Ambassador to China by Trump, and although his Lieutenant Governor is now incumbent, it seems the state house is the most susceptible to a Democrat victory in almost a decade. We are barely into the Gubernatorial election of 2018, why do Democrats need to be focused on anything else.
For me, though, my biggest problem is the most obvious.
Time For Biden suggest that the best plan of victory is to get Biden a clear path to victory by scaring every one else away.
Not only is this not a good idea, this seems like a colossally bad idea.
I can quickly point out the years where there was no Presidential incumbent where there was a quick near anointing - 2000 Gore and 2016 Clinton.
On the other hand, when there's a crowd, it only brings all of the issues out and finds the best battle tested candidate. 1976 gave us 14 Democrats and a victory in the fall (and 2016's crowd of 15 GOP hopefuls only goes to further my point).
1992 was a year where the caucus and primary process found Bill Clinton. Now, native son Tom Harkin won Iowa, but the process found a candidate who had the ability to win.
Similarly, 2008, of course, made Barack Obama battle tested and ready. Would John Edwards or Hillary Clinton been able to win in November? certainly hindsight says Obama was the best candidate of the three. I suspect Obama's campaign was also bolstered by competition from Dennis Kucinich and Bill Richardson, who forced him to earn the respect of their supporters.
(To close out the modern day primaries that resulted in a White House residency- 1980 Reagan faced a battle from George Bush who won Iowa, a targeted candidacy from John Anderson and heavy hitters like John Connally and Howard Baker. 1988 and 2000 were less coronations for the respective Bushes than you remember. The Senior had faced formidable competition from not only Bob Dole but Pat Robertson. The Junior had a crowd of candidates you have since forgot like Alan Keyes, Steve Forbes, Gary Bauer, and Libby Dole, not to mention John McCain)
In any case, more candidates may be better for the Party than fewer. I understand that's an argument Time for Biden is likely unwilling to hear. Nor are they unlikely to realize that the Democrats are the party of fresh blood, which is why they have had success in unknowns like Clinton, Carter and Obama, and second efforts from Gephardt, Edwards, and Gary Hart have bombed out.
We can only watch and wait and see.
Lest you think, it's too early, Joe Biden already has courters. Two Quad City men lead a group called Time For Biden and expect to have a Headquarters up and running by March 2018.
Now, granted, way more candidates are losers than winners in Presidential Elections. Still, it seems the ones that are courted the most are the biggest failures.
Arguably, the heaviest courted candidate before caucus was Chris Christie in 2016. He eventually ended up with less than 2 percent of the vote that year.
Remember Scott Walker's Presidential run? No? He was also heavily courted but didn't even make it to the caucus.
You can probably line up several heavy hitters: Rick Perry, Fred Thompson, Jeb Bush, Wesley Clark. of course, you can probably find a list of reasons why these campaigns crashed on landing. Still, it's not easy as it sounds. Thompson and Clark probably waited too long to enter, so no worry there.
Still, the Ridin' with Biden movement is getting some noise from Iowa Democrats. Iowa Governor Terry Branstad was named Ambassador to China by Trump, and although his Lieutenant Governor is now incumbent, it seems the state house is the most susceptible to a Democrat victory in almost a decade. We are barely into the Gubernatorial election of 2018, why do Democrats need to be focused on anything else.
For me, though, my biggest problem is the most obvious.
Time For Biden suggest that the best plan of victory is to get Biden a clear path to victory by scaring every one else away.
Not only is this not a good idea, this seems like a colossally bad idea.
I can quickly point out the years where there was no Presidential incumbent where there was a quick near anointing - 2000 Gore and 2016 Clinton.
On the other hand, when there's a crowd, it only brings all of the issues out and finds the best battle tested candidate. 1976 gave us 14 Democrats and a victory in the fall (and 2016's crowd of 15 GOP hopefuls only goes to further my point).
1992 was a year where the caucus and primary process found Bill Clinton. Now, native son Tom Harkin won Iowa, but the process found a candidate who had the ability to win.
Similarly, 2008, of course, made Barack Obama battle tested and ready. Would John Edwards or Hillary Clinton been able to win in November? certainly hindsight says Obama was the best candidate of the three. I suspect Obama's campaign was also bolstered by competition from Dennis Kucinich and Bill Richardson, who forced him to earn the respect of their supporters.
(To close out the modern day primaries that resulted in a White House residency- 1980 Reagan faced a battle from George Bush who won Iowa, a targeted candidacy from John Anderson and heavy hitters like John Connally and Howard Baker. 1988 and 2000 were less coronations for the respective Bushes than you remember. The Senior had faced formidable competition from not only Bob Dole but Pat Robertson. The Junior had a crowd of candidates you have since forgot like Alan Keyes, Steve Forbes, Gary Bauer, and Libby Dole, not to mention John McCain)
In any case, more candidates may be better for the Party than fewer. I understand that's an argument Time for Biden is likely unwilling to hear. Nor are they unlikely to realize that the Democrats are the party of fresh blood, which is why they have had success in unknowns like Clinton, Carter and Obama, and second efforts from Gephardt, Edwards, and Gary Hart have bombed out.
We can only watch and wait and see.
Comments
Post a Comment
Contact us