Hillary is Mondale Without the Locked-In Superdelegates

[Adelante]

Gary Hart: Obama Won't Fade

The Barack of '84 Thinks Hillary is Mondale Without the Locked-In Superdelegates

Hart sees the Clinton-Obama race playing out the way his did, but with the potential for a very different ending.

“It will go to the convention like it did in ‘84, but (Obama’s) got a much better chance of getting support from superdelegates than I did, because most of them were lined up with Fritz before New Hampshire.”

That’s the key difference: While Hart had toiled in virtual anonymity before New Hampshire made him a star, superdelegates have been aware of Obama from the beginning of this race. And they may be savvier in 2008 about not lining up so quickly behind the establishment favorite. Superdelegates were a new creation in 1984.

“I assume (Hillary) and her husband are on the phone with them now, and they’re saying, ‘Remember when I had you to the White House,’ or ‘Remember when I campaigned for you,’” Hart said.

Obama’s pitch, Hart believes, is his ability to attract independents and Republicans to the ticket in the fall.

“It’s going to be a question of loyalty versus electability,” he said, “because it’s going to be clear to everyone by then that (Obama) is the strongest general election candidate.”

The electability argument, he stressed, is not just about whether either candidate is capable of winning the general election; it’s a matter of what effect their presence will have on other Democratic candidates who will be on the ballot with the ultimate nominee -- more than a few of whom will be superdelegates at the convention.

“If some of them are elected officials who will be up in ‘08, they might be persuaded,” said Hart. “The idea is not just to win -- it’s not to get dragged down.”

http://www.observer.com/2008/gary-hart-obama-wont-fade

[denem]

1. Hillary's is no Mondale

Nor is Obama anything like Hart. Mondale sunk the Democrats for decades with 'I will raise your taxes'. Hart's campaign was a shambles and underfunded. And as any Conservative will tell you, MCain's no Reagan.

Hart is grandstanding IMO, but DSB would know better than I do.

[Adelante]

4. I don't think that's the point at all

Mondale tied down superdelegates before New Hampshire and Hillary didn't, so the result may be different than it was for Mondale.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. LOL

My opinion is no better or worse than the opinion of any other person on this board but I would like to think it is more dispassionate and informed...

There's a saying in sports that the x's and o's don't win championships...It's the Jerry's and Joe's who do...

There should be a saying in politics... The political environment determines who wins and loses , not the candidate...

Of course great coaching and great candidates as well as poor coaches and poor candidates can make a difference on the margins...

What does it all mean?

Jesus Christ wouldn't have beat Ronald Reagan in 1984...Ronald Reagan was (perceived) as bringing America's economy back to health, restoring America's military, and creating a sense of optimism...It was "Morning In America" they said...

Oh- for the record I was an ardent supporter of Gary Hart in 1984 and 1988...

[Hart2008]

11. Reagan was not all that popular in '84. Mondale made him into St. Ronnie.

The '82 recession was the worst recession since the great depression. Reagan tried to blame that on Jimmy Carter, but the Dem's won enough seats in the House in '82 to end the ability of Repukes to work with the Boll Weevil Southern Dem's who were colluding with Reagan.

After Hart won New Hampshire, Gallup polls showed him beating Reagan. Mondale was always behind. Another poll at the time of the convention showed Hart beating Reagan, while Mondale was losing. Hart delegates slid the newspaper that published this under the doors of the Mondale delegates' hotel rooms. In his acceptance speech, Mondale promised to raise taxes. Hart predicted he would lose after hearing this. It was all down hill from there, but there was the one time when Reagan showed his vulnerability: the first debate in Louisville.

In the first debate between Reagan and Mondale in Louisville, Reagan appeared befuddled leading people to question the effect of his age:

Why did the issue of President Reagan's fitness for office because of his age and health vault into headlines this week?

Mr. Reagan, at 73 years of age, is the oldest United States President, and his age has been an issue since before he took office. But only since his debate with Walter F. Mondale Sunday night has the issue been dealt with at length this year by newspapers and television reporters.
,,,
The President's performance in the debate, which even his aides described as ''tentative,'' seems to have been the catalyst for the emergence of the issue.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=980DE2DD1639F932A25753C1A962948260


http://www.museum.tv/debateweb/html/history/1984/video.htm
(I note that this site incorrectly states that Mondale's remarks about Reagan's age followed Reagan's joke. This is how the networks reported the event at the time, but in fact Mondale was asked the question first.)

The reality is that they wouldn't have been able to paint Hart as a tax and spend liberal like were with Mondale. Moreover, the juxtaposition of the then 46 year old Hart with the 73 year old Reagan would have a far starker contrast than with the silver-haired Mondale.

When the public saw the stumbling performance Reagan gave in that first debate, people began to pay attention. At the second debate, with the outcome hanging in the balance, Mondale refused to press the issue, stating that Reagan's age should not be an issue. A far better response would have been the following:
"Four years ago the Reagan campaign stole President Carter's briefing book for the debate. They were able to script lines for him in those debates. What you saw in Louisville wasn't the President's age showing, but an actor without his lines."

Instead of keeping Reagan on the offensive, Mondale pulled his punches.

Hart wouldn't have done that.

[THUNDER HANDS]

14. you could flip them all around

Obama is like Reagan, McCain is like Mondale and Hart is like Hillary.

[Perky]

2. Hillary is Hubert Humphrey.. Obama is RFK/McCarthy

[ElsewheresDaughter]

8. Obama is NO RFK

[jackson_dem]

16. Hillary is one of the greatest progressives ever?

;)

[Hart2008]

17. NOT! n/t

[Tarc]

3. Gary Hart? Why does this has-been continue to get airtime?

[Hart2008]

5. Maybe he doesn't want to see another 49 state loss in November.

He very well could be Obama's VP or serve in his cabinet.

He is hardly a has been.

:hi:

[Tarc]

7. Ahh, just like a bad penny...

Gary Hart couldn't even keep his dick out a super-model long enough to beat Walter Mondale, who got smoked in the general elections. And there's thought that he's VP material? :rofl: Alan Keyes has a better chance than Hart does at that.

[scheming daemons]

10. A Clinton supporter is going to talk about...

...someone ELSE who couldn't keep it in his pants????


Wow....talk about chutzpah.

[Tarc]

15. The difference is that one still had enough good qualities to win the White House

while the other is consigned to the dustbin of history, along with the other irrelevants.

[Hart2008]

12. How is the foremost expert in the Dem party on homeland security a bad penny?

You sound like a Repuke who loves Alan Keyes, and as usual your facts are wrong.

[Bitwit1234]

9. The other candidate reminds you of BIZARRO...

[book_worm]

13. well Obama isn't Hart and Clinton isn't Mondale and this isn't '84

Actually after Mondale got his campaign back on track he won many primaries and had a clear lead going into the convention in '84 so much so that he picked his VP before the convention and Hart was not really contesting it anymore--though he kept his delegates and went to the convention. This time there will be a real fight at the convention in all liklihood.