As Ford Showed In ‘76, Obama Had No Obligation To Defeated Candidate
Taken as a general matter, since the current primary-heavy process of selecting nominees began in 1972, victorious Presidential nominees have not selected their nearest rival in contested nomination fights as the Vice Presidential nominee.
Only twice in contested nomination battles beginning with 1972 has the Vice Presidential nominee been the second place finisher in total primary votes. The Democratic ticket in 2004 and the Republican slate in 1980 are the two.
The 2008 Democratic race was the closest in vote totals, but the ideological fight for the Republican nomination in 1976 (Convention photo above) may have been the more intense struggle.
In 2008, Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Clinton of New York each won just over 48% of the popular vote in the primaries with Mr. Obama winning a few more votes than Mrs. Clinton. For Republicans, John McCain of Arizona took around 45% of the total with Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Mike Huckabee of Arkansas each in the low 20’s.
In going with Joe Biden of Delaware, Senator Obama has made his call. Senator McCain will do the same next week.
Here is some history on this matter—
John Kerry of Massachusetts won 61% of Democratic primary voters in 2004. His closest competitor, John Edwards of North Carolina, won 19% of all such voters and got a spot on the ticket.
In 2000 Al Gore of Tennessee (76% of Democratic primary voters) did not pick Bill Bradley of New Jersey (20%). Nor did George W. Bush of Texas (63% of Republican primary voters) select Mr. McCain (30%).
In 1996, Bob Dole of Kansas (61%) left Pat Buchanan of Virginia (24%) off the ticket.
In 1992, Bill Clinton of Arkansas (52%) selected neither Jerry Brown of California (20%) or Paul Tsongas of Massachusetts (18%).
In 1988, George H.W. Bush of Texas (68%) did not make Mr. Dole (19%) his running mate. Mike Dukakis of Massachusetts (43%) did not offer the spot to Jesse Jackson of Illinois (29%).
The 1984 Democratic race was hard fought. Still Walter Mondale of Minnesota (38%) denied Gary Hart of Colorado (36%) a place on the ticket. This was a race almost as close as 2008.
In 1980, incumbent Vice President Mondale stayed on the slate after President Jimmy Carter of Georgia (51%) beat Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts (37%) for the nomination.
In the 1980 Republican race, the second place finisher did get the second spot. Ronald Reagan of California (61%) picked Mr. Bush (23%) as his number two.
In 1976, Mr. Carter (39%) did not offer the job to Mr. Brown (15%), George Wallace of Alabama (12%) or Morris Udall of Arizona (10%),
In the fiercely fought Republican race in 1976 , President Gerald Ford of Michigan (53%) did not offer the Vice Presidency to Mr. Reagan (46%). Senator Dole was President Ford’s choice.
1972 was the last time the nominee was not the top vote getter in the primaries. Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota won 26% of the vote against 25% for George McGovern of South Dakota and 24% for George Wallace. The nominee, Mr. McGovern did not offer the VP spot to either gentleman.
( Governor George Wallace stands in the schoolhouse door blocking integration in Alabama. Neither George McGovern or Jimmy Carter thought it best to run with Mr. Wallace in a Presidential election.)
TL -
How did you calculate the vote totals? Did you use Michigan and Florida? How did you calculate the caucus states? Vote totals are confusing. I would stay away from them.
I found a listing that both included Michigan and Florida, and then did not include Florida and Michigan. I used the one that did not include these states because I’m so tired of hearing that these rule-breaking states should be included, when Mr. Obama followed the process that was established and did not make an effort in either place.
The question isn’t if Michigan and Florida followed the rules as set by the Democrat party, it’s: why those rules are there to begin with?
Why does the Democrat brain trust care when which state has it’s primary?
Further, what is so “democratic” about forcing a state into Super Tuesday when it has no desire to be there? Why are Michigan and Florida Democrat voters discounted because their home state Democrat representatives decided to change their primary date? How does this rule serve the people at all?
As far as Obama not picking Hillary, it’s quite simple: Nowhere is it written that the primary winner must pick the second place candidate as his/her VP selection. The presumptive candidate should pick someone that helps his/her bid for the White House.
I am of the opinion that Biden actually hurts Obama’s cause, a topic I’ve explored elsewhere on this blog, so I won’t go into it here, but I don’t understand what the big deal is about him not selecting Clinton.
Seriously, can you see yourself working with her for 4 years? Yikes, I’d pass too.
Chris—You might be right that the rule was silly from the start, but they were the agreed upon rules.
As for Senator Clinton, she made her call on how to conduct her own campaign, and now she has a chance to be part of winning back the White House in a different way than she imagined at first. Hopefully she will be on board.
Thank you for this comment.
Agreed upon by whom?
Did those people in Michigan and Florida get a say?
How the Democrats can silence two swing states full of delegates because someone decided that Iowa and New Hampshire HAD to have their primaries first is beyond me.
I can’t understand how they can still call themselves “Democrats” when the people, who have a valid opinion on who should represent them, are completely ignored. That doesn’t seem very democratic.