Best candidate?

[The Duke]

Ideology aside, who do you think was the best candidate or campaigner?  You don't have to like this person at all, but who was the best?

I say Bill Clinton.

[ShapeShifter]

George W. Bush and his team are tough cookies.

Great poll, John.

[StevenNick]

I've gotta say Bill Clinton too.  The guy was a genius at campaigning.  He felt my pain.  

[The Duke]

George W. Bush and his team are tough cookies.

Great poll, John.

Thanks Shifter.

[Michael Z]

Slick Willy, no doubt.

[dunn]

from these - Clinton

[JohnFKennedy]

Bill Clinton was best campaigner.

If this was on ideology it would have to be John Edwards.

[© tweed]

Clinton, probably.  Edwards is good too, he just hasn't gotten to the top yet.

[The Duke]

Finally a poll where Clinton gets above 49%.

[ShapeShifter]

Finally a poll where Clinton gets above 49%.

And it is all your fault!

[ShapeShifter]

From the list: Bill Clinton no doubt.
Write- In: Ronald Reagan

Carter and Mondale were some really weak candidates to run against.

[JohnFKennedy]

I think it is in the last 10 years possibly, Reagan is no way near as recent as the rest of those.

[The Duke]

I was only thinking since 1996 when I said "recent years", but I agree that Reagan was a great campaigner.

[Giant Saguaro]

Of the choices, definitely Bill Clinton. Expert campaigner.

Ronald Reagan gets an honorable mention, though. I would argue that he and Clinton both faced two weak candidates, and many losing candidates could be argued to be weak, but Reagan had more broad-based support and much larger margins of victory than Clinton.

I would like to vote for my man John McCain, but his primary run in 2000 was disappointing to say the least. In my opinion, one of his untimely problems is that he opens up the door on occasion for people to misrepresent him and lie about him and when he decides he's going to set the record straight it's usually too late and he either loses his cool or blows it off and just adds to the controversy. Would have made a fantastic President, though, especially in the post 9/11 world.  

[ShapeShifter]

Of the choices, definitely Bill Clinton. Expert campaigner.

Ronald Reagan gets an honorable mention, though. I would argue that he and Clinton both faced two weak candidates, and many losing candidates could be argued to be weak, but Reagan had more broad-based support and much larger margins of victory than Clinton.

I would like to vote for my man John McCain, but his primary run in 2000 was disappointing to say the least. In my opinion, one of his untimely problems is that he opens up the door on occasion for people to misrepresent him and lie about him and when he decides he's going to set the record straight it's usually too late and he either loses his cool or blows it off and just adds to the controversy. Would have made a fantastic President, though, especially in the post 9/11 world.  

Just curious, Why you think McCain lost the primary?

I think he would had made a great president too.

[Giant Saguaro]

Of the choices, definitely Bill Clinton. Expert campaigner.

Ronald Reagan gets an honorable mention, though. I would argue that he and Clinton both faced two weak candidates, and many losing candidates could be argued to be weak, but Reagan had more broad-based support and much larger margins of victory than Clinton.

I would like to vote for my man John McCain, but his primary run in 2000 was disappointing to say the least. In my opinion, one of his untimely problems is that he opens up the door on occasion for people to misrepresent him and lie about him and when he decides he's going to set the record straight it's usually too late and he either loses his cool or blows it off and just adds to the controversy. Would have made a fantastic President, though, especially in the post 9/11 world.  

Just curious, Why you think McCain lost the primary?

I think he would had made a great president too.

Well, I've given it some thought and over-all I think Bush was better able to rally the really, really conservative base that votes in the primaries. He got the symphathy vote to some extent too from the primary voters because of his dad. Also, I'm thinking that in general this country has been moving rightward over the last 20 years or so and when things are moving your way you want to keep them moving your way. In other words, keep moving right no matter how far right you are now. And I think the base saw McCain as a step back to the middle. It's similar to why the Dems nominated Mondale in 1984, I think. Keep it going to left and it doesn't matter if we collapse or not.

Bush played up the temper issue too, like McCain was a nut waiting to get in and start dropping bombs everywhere. Ridiculous.

McCain also made a big mistake when he was asked at a town hall meeting what he would do to protect the second amendment, and he retorted to the person that asked it what the person would do to protect our kids from guns in schools. That didn't go over with the NRA crowd very well AT ALL.

There are probably lots of reasons, actually. In short, Bush just appealed to the base better. The base felt McCain was looking beyond them, probably.

IMO, McCain was the actual conservative of the two, but because he couldn't get that straight with anybody, he lost.

[ShapeShifter]

Of the choices, definitely Bill Clinton. Expert campaigner.

Ronald Reagan gets an honorable mention, though. I would argue that he and Clinton both faced two weak candidates, and many losing candidates could be argued to be weak, but Reagan had more broad-based support and much larger margins of victory than Clinton.

I would like to vote for my man John McCain, but his primary run in 2000 was disappointing to say the least. In my opinion, one of his untimely problems is that he opens up the door on occasion for people to misrepresent him and lie about him and when he decides he's going to set the record straight it's usually too late and he either loses his cool or blows it off and just adds to the controversy. Would have made a fantastic President, though, especially in the post 9/11 world.  

Just curious, Why you think McCain lost the primary?

I think he would had made a great president too.

Well, I've given it some thought and over-all I think Bush was better able to rally the really, really conservative base that votes in the primaries. He got the symphathy vote to some extent too from the primary voters because of his dad. Also, I'm thinking that in general this country has been moving rightward over the last 20 years or so and when things are moving your way you want to keep them moving your way. In other words, keep moving right no matter how far right you are now. And I think the base saw McCain as a step back to the middle. It's similar to why the Dems nominated Mondale in 1984, I think. Keep it going to left and it doesn't matter if we collapse or not.

Bush played up the temper issue too, like McCain was a nut waiting to get in and start dropping bombs everywhere. Ridiculous.

McCain also made a big mistake when he was asked at a town hall meeting what he would do to protect the second amendment, and he retorted to the person that asked it what the person would do to protect our kids from guns in schools. That didn't go over with the NRA crowd very well AT ALL.

There are probably lots of reasons, actually. In short, Bush just appealed to the base better. The base felt McCain was looking beyond them, probably.

IMO, McCain was the actual conservative of the two, but because he couldn't get that straight with anybody, he lost.

Thanks for the informative response.

[zachman]

I was 4 in 1992 but since 2000, I would have to say John McCain. The guy came around everywhere in our state and brought confetti guns to fall from our town hall. Edwards gets a close second for his many stops and outstanding Edwards cheering team before the rallies.

[ShapeShifter]

I was 4 in 1992 but since 2000, I would have to say John McCain. The guy came around everywhere in our state and brought confetti guns to fall from our town hall. Edwards gets a close second for his many stops and outstanding Edwards cheering team before the rallies.

I'm jealous. No one ever really comes by here in NYC, especially the Bronx.

[The Dowager Mod]

clinton i guess

[PBrunsel]

Howard Dean knew how to invigorate crowds.

[opebo]

George W. Bush, clearly.  He won in 2000 in spite of their being no reason he should.  Clinton only won because of the timing of recession.

[zachman]

George W. Bush, clearly.  He won in 2000 in spite of their being no reason he should.  Clinton only won because of the timing of recession.

Bush's rallies in NH were too large and he had a less accessible calender, although I did get Carlton Fisk's autograph at one of Bush's rallies.

[StevenNick]

From the list: Bill Clinton no doubt.
Write- In: Ronald Reagan

Carter and Mondale were some really weak candidates to run against.

But Pat Brown and Jesse Unruh weren't weak candidates.

[MHS2002]

I'd have to go with Clinton. He always seemed like a person you could relate to, like when he played the sax on Arsenio Hall.