TRIVIA: When's the last time USA elected a President from Congress?

[Essene]

And why might that be significant for the primaries?

[CatWoman]

1. was it Kennedy?

:shrug:

[LSparkle]

2. Ding ding ding I believe you're right

[Fresh_Start]

3. Bush the elder NT

NT

[sinkingfeeling]

6. Bush I was VP.

[Fresh_Start]

10. thought you were trying to see if Congressional experience

excluded Presidential asperations. Didn't realize you meant to exclude former VPs.

[Essene]

16. The issue is electing somebody out of Congress. VP makes you an executive type regardless of past

[calico1]

4. JFK.

And before him there was only one other. Who was that?

[bornskeptic]

18. Actually, there were two others.

Warren Harding was elected directly from the Senate.
James Garfield was elected directly from the House.

[Essene]

19. Really? I didnt appreciate that...

that this trend is even older, although it's very "american" in spirit.

[calico1]

26. Thanks. I was thinking "Senate"

but you are correct about Garfield.

[sinkingfeeling]

5. JFK?

[Proud2BAmurkin]

7. That always hits me as a bullshit statistic. Kerry almost won.

[Benhurst]

13. He did win; but the election was stolen. Of course that may very well happen again.

[Essene]

17. It isnt a "statistic." It's a 48 year empirical trend... a significant one.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

20. But only what, TWO elections since then had a congressperson vs a governor or VP?

Not sure how many but not many to be significant

[Essene]

27. It's insincere to pretend there were only "two" elections. Address the trend in all its facets...

Including how well incumbents do...

[Fresh_Start]

8. Bush Sr, Nixon, Johnson all served in Congress

before being elected to President

[Yael]

9. Kennedy was the last senator to be elected POTUS

[napi21]

11. JFK was the last one elected directly from the Senate and wasn't

a VP first. Other that updating history, I don't think it means anything in this election. The reason I keep hearing for not electing Senators of House members is because their voting record is so easy to trace, and the way Congress works, EVERY member will have a record of voting against things their supporters wouldn't like and in favor of some they didn't like either. There are so many different votes taken on each bill, the cndidate can be made to look bad even when they're not. (remember Kerry and the iI voted for it before I voted against it. That was true, but most people don't understand how the voting in Congress really works.)

[Essene]

15. I think a 48 year trend DOES have meaning...

I would concur that the issue of having a legislative record is a major reason. A good legislator engages in a lot of discussions with people, including lobbyists... and sometimes makes compromises. Compromise is part of the sausage factory.

Thus, those who come out of legislative sausage factories have a lot of stuff to be used against them, if not just because they have been involved with so many more types of people in the power trade business. Flip flopper, corruption, shady friends, tool of lobbyists and special interests... all easily cast as smears on ANY Congressman. More to the point... even though most americans hate Bush... they have Congress even more. Americans cannot relate to the legislative process or even to the idea of compromise, because the entire charade is that everybody's pretending to be uncompromising and principled. Make deals, compromises and thus law behind closed doors, then go outside to the press and call each other names. That's legislative politics.

However.

I'd argue there's more to it than just this.

Congress produces a different style of politician and americans don't like the smell. Congressmen will happily rant for eternity about bills and legislative nuance, throwing Fox News style slogans and misrepresenting the opposing arguments. Congressmen tend to behave like Sunday morning partisan spin doctors at all times. In fact, most of what america KNOWS about Congressmen comes through those types of TV shows and then coverage of scandals.

"Executive" experience and political styles are infinitely more compelling as November comes around. If you aren't a red neck governor or a cowboy, you better have played one on the screen.

Seriously. lol

We lean towards the ones running for Commander-in-Chief rather than Legislator-in-Chief. We pick the GUY who best fits our idea of the Commander. And more importantly... the executive records of governors are far more compelling than that of Legislators.

Sorry folks... but Hillary's best rhetoric and plans about Health Care cannot stand up against somebody like Romney who will claim to have DONE health care reform (to cover everybody, as the story goes). Operatives can attack what he actually accomplished, but in the end he absolutely will WIN that argument as the rugged Governor who made a bi-partisan plan work as an executive. The same advantage in a general election exists for Rudy, Huckabee and Mike Bloomberg. The "odd ball" is Mccain, but his primary identification is with the Military and he's probably the most "executive" persona in the Congress.

So, what does this mean for November?

If Mccain is the GOP nominee, then the trend will be broken but the underlying factors in the trend remain.

The Dems have 3 people with no real executive experience whatsoever. Hillary fakes it in every sense, latching onto associations of her Hubby when it's expedient. She's been a junior senator for 2 terms. Edwards has ONE term. Obama has more experience as an elected official, but has absolutely no executive experience.

And i dont think running campaigns or being a partner in a law firm counts...

What on earth were the Democrats thinking? How hard was it to find and rally around a strong, moderate Governor?

[Proud2BAmurkin]

21. Not if the "trend" really only represents about two races

[Essene]

25. Yea, ok. There are underlying reasons we don't rally around Congressmen IMO

That goes for primaries, too.

[napi21]

23. The only disagreement I have with anything you said is your comments about

Hillary. I've used these examples in the past, and I believe they are valid too.

My husband is a meat cutter. I couldn't do HIS JOB, but I can do a lot better than anyone else I know at cutting steaks, deboneing chicken, & cutting a pork roasst into steaks or chops. WHY? We've been married 44 years and I've watched and learned.

I was a buyer, an accountant, and a director of finance. I couldn't run a shipping dept. but I know a lot about shipping rates, rate comparrisons, restrictions & requirements. I have contacts and relationships with a lot of the right people in the raw materials & finished goods businesses that relate to the market catagory where I worked as a buyer. As Dir. of Finance I was responsible for the MIS Dept. I can't program much more than an old action in DOS, but I learned enough to many times spot where the problems are in a program because I can see something that's just not right.

My point is, after having spet 8 years in the WH, hosting events at the WH for foreign leaders, traveling to many Countries and meeting most foreign leaders, knowing what was asked of congress and how it was presented & received IS experience. She already KNOWS the personalities of Musharoff, Putin, and ost of the other leaders the US must deal with all the time. There is value to that kind of experience for sure!

[Essene]

24. Knowledge and experience arent the same thing (although knowledge counts for a lot).

She has no executive experience.

The dems are putting up noboyd with executive experience when the Republicans are almost all Governor/Mayor types.

Toss in Bloomberg eating away at moderates, and it's OVER for the Dems in 2008.

Seems fairly simple to me.

Her knowledge can also be held against her, because she's a Clinton afterall.

[TomClash]

12. JFK nt

[Occam Bandage]

14. It doesn't matter, really. Only two Senators have ever been elected, and all three are Senators.

[bornskeptic]

22. Here's a tougher one.

Who was the last major party candidate from Congress who lost to someone other than an incumbent President?

[THUNDER HANDS]

28. Gore

was a senator, and a VP holds legislative power.