Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

David Broder revisited: Why Few Senators Become Presidents

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
smada Donating Member (311 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 01:05 PM
Original message
David Broder revisited: Why Few Senators Become Presidents
David Broder: Why Few Senators Become Presidents

An interesting read considering Kerry is a Senator and Dean was a Governor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
1. Hmmm...
MSN Group "Rush v. Reality" has a different take.

http://groups.msn.com/rushversusreality/rushvsreality2001julydec.msnw

Scroll down to the July 20, 2001 entry.

The White House web page provides personal and political biographies of the forty-two men who have served as president (forty-one who were elected or ascended to the office, plus one appointed by the Supreme Court). Its biographies reveal that "most" presidents did not serve either in the US Senate or as state governors. Of the 42 White House occupants, 16 fall into this category (Washington, J. Adams, Jefferson, Madison, WH Harrison, Taylor, Fillmore, Lincoln, Grant, Garfield, Arthur, Taft, Hoover, Eisenhower, Ford, and GHW Bush).

The record also reflects that senators generally do make it to the presidency—at least as often as State governors. Fourteen previously served as US Senators and fourteen as governors (two presidents served in both capacities).

The 14 former US Senators: Monroe, JQ Adams, Jackson, Van Buren, Tyler, Pierce, Buchanan, A. Johnson, B. Harrison, Harding, Truman, Kennedy, LB Johnson, and Nixon.

The 14 former state governors: Tyler, Polk, Hayes, Cleveland, McKinley, T. Roosevelt, Wilson, Harding, Coolidge, FD Roosevelt, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, and GW Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markdd Donating Member (304 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. What happens to the mix..
when you add the requirement for a "sitting" Senator or Governor at the time of the election?

I think Kennedy was a sitting senator, LBJ and Truman were already sitting Presidents when they first ran for the office. Nixon had been out of the senate since at least 1952 when he first ran fro President. Clinton and Carter were already out of office. Shrub was Gov when the election happened.

Anal point, Andy Johnson was not elected President, he succeeded Lincoln and was never elected at the head of the ticket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
2. Kerry beat Dean.
Get over it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. You can't argue with his facts
Except the one where he says Gore was beaten. But then Gore was VP.
As far as Kerry winning, it is not impossible just because it rarely happens. He needs Dean. :7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. Senator Kennedy beat Vice President Nixon.
Senator Kerry can beat Gov. Bush, don't you think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denverbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
5. I only partly agree.
Personally, I think the reason a Senator is worse than a Governor is that a Senator has to vote hundreds or thousands of times.

Kerry could vote for a tax cut, then have Republicans add a capital gains tax cut to the bill, and force him to vote against it. Then in the campaign, they can truthfully say he 'voted against a tax cut'.

Plus, there is the added disadvantage of having to vote even on things that never come close to becoming law.

As President or Governor, you only vote on bills which have passed both houses and passed reconciliation. So instead of having 1000 votes over the course of a year, the President or Governor, in signing the bills, only 'votes' a couple of times. He doesn't have to vote against one tax bill then for another, he only votes on the final bill.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 01:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC