How does a moderate candidate get nominated, would win the general election in a landslide. (1 Viewer)

[SwampDawg]

This may not be true here being a political forum but the vast majority of people I know IRL have held their noses when voting the last few elections because they don't support the far right that runs the Republican party or the far left that controls the Democratic party. The problem is you have little chance of getting nominated by either party without the support of the far fringes. Just going to use the Republicans as an example since the Dems currently control the Whitehouse. If they run Trump in 2024 maybe they win, maybe they don't but either way it will be by the skin of their teeth and the losing side will debate the results. If they ran a moderate Republican that was fiscally conservative, favored business but also was more liberal socially and more small business then big business favoritism I predict they would win with 65% or more in favor. Who else are the Trump supporters going to vote for and you pull back a bunch of people who voted Biden because of an utter disdain for Trump. Same  could have been said of the Democrats in 2016 if they would have run someone less polarizing and more moderate then Hillary they win easily. A George W. Bush or Bill Clinton type seems so far off the choices we are given today.

My preferred answer has always been a third party, a real third party that splits off from the others but that seems to be a pipe dream. And the current powers that be in the two parties we have seem to be happy to push more to the extreme and just trade the presidency back and forth every 4 to 8 years then actually try and evolve and win easily.

 

[rockaction]

I predict they would win with 65% or more in favor.

That would be the landslide of landslides. Reagan beat Mondale with a 58.8% of the votes, and that was historically uneven. 1936 saw FDR with 60.6% of the vote. What you're saying would be beyond historic. 

My preferred answer has always been a third party, a real third party that splits off from the others but that seems to be a pipe dream. And the current powers that be in the two parties we have seem to be happy to push more to the extreme and just trade the presidency back and forth every 4 to 8 years then actually try and evolve and win easily.

Don't forget, Trump arose from the ashes of a third party. He was a Reform Party candidate and supporter up through the beginning of the aughts, if I'm not mistaken. He took the Reform Party coalition with him into the voting booth. 

This may not be true here being a political forum but the vast majority of people I know IRL have held their noses when voting the last few elections because they don't support the far right that runs the Republican party or the far left that controls the Democratic party.

There are a lot of us here that believe that. Your points are taken. Lots of people want a viable third party with a more moderate candidate. Other third party people are more outside the fringes of the Democratic and Republican platforms, and thus are actually advocating less moderate candidates, which is something you wouldn't agree with them on. 

 

[quick-hands]

This may not be true here being a political forum but the vast majority of people I know IRL have held their noses when voting the last few elections because they don't support the far right that runs the Republican party or the far left that controls the Democratic party. The problem is you have little chance of getting nominated by either party without the support of the far fringes. Just going to use the Republicans as an example since the Dems currently control the Whitehouse. If they run Trump in 2024 maybe they win, maybe they don't but either way it will be by the skin of their teeth and the losing side will debate the results. If they ran a moderate Republican that was fiscally conservative, favored business but also was more liberal socially and more small business then big business favoritism I predict they would win with 65% or more in favor. Who else are the Trump supporters going to vote for and you pull back a bunch of people who voted Biden because of an utter disdain for Trump. Same  could have been said of the Democrats in 2016 if they would have run someone less polarizing and more moderate then Hillary they win easily. A George W. Bush or Bill Clinton type seems so far off the choices we are given today.

My preferred answer has always been a third party, a real third party that splits off from the others but that seems to be a pipe dream. And the current powers that be in the two parties we have seem to be happy to push more to the extreme and just trade the presidency back and forth every 4 to 8 years then actually try and evolve and win easily.

It's easier to take over a party than start a new one.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Romney and Obama were both moderates, and they were both cast as The Greatest Villains In American History by the time the campaign was over.  There's no such thing as a "moderate" presidential candidate in this media landscape.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Biden was a moderate candidate for the Democrats. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Biden was a moderate candidate for the Democrats. 

And that too, of course.

 

[Osaurus]

Low voter turnout? 

 

[SwampDawg]

Biden was a moderate candidate for the Democrats. 

IMHO if Biden runs in 2016 he wins and maybe is that, the problem is by 2020 Biden became a puppet of the rest of the Democratic party and their farther left agendas.

 

[SwampDawg]

Don't forget, Trump arose from the ashes of a third party. He was a Reform Party candidate and supporter up through the beginning of the aughts, if I'm not mistaken. He took the Reform Party coalition with him into the voting booth. 

I don't think Trump took many of the original Reform Party voters who supported Perot with him in 2016 and 2020 unless they were voting lesser of the two evils. The Trump campaign of 2000 are in stark contrast to what he was selling in the last two elections.

 

[Juxtatarot]

IMHO if Biden runs in 2016 he wins and maybe is that, the problem is by 2020 Biden became a puppet of the rest of the Democratic party and their farther left agendas.

On some things, perhaps. Plenty he doesn’t agree with the far left about. Health care is one example. Legalization of marijuana is other — that’s even mainstream now.

 

[tymarsas]

Get rid of parties for presidential candidates. Why have a primary process at all? All presidents should be independents.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

More moderate than Hillary?

Regardless, as long as we have a two party system with only two real candidates we are going to be driven by the extreme whims of those parties.  It sucks, but there's absolutely nothing on the horizon to even remotely change that and every time we take 1 step forward in fixing that we follow it up with 500 steps back.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Joe Biden has been in politics for our entire lives. He’s got a longer track record than any politician in Washington. He’s always been nothing other than a middle of the road milquetoast establishment lackey. He’s been the biggest gift to banking, Wall Street, the military and corporate capitalism of any politician in my lifetime. Wins an election and now he’s the second coming of Lenin. 

 

[BladeRunner]

Joe Biden has been in politics for our entire lives. He’s got a longer track record than any politician in Washington. He’s always been nothing other than a middle of the road milquetoast establishment lackey. He’s been the biggest gift to banking, Wall Street, the military and corporate capitalism of any politician in my lifetime. Wins an election and now he’s the second coming of Lenin. 

You guys are acting as if hes the one in actually in charge and running things.

Its not Biden we nevessarily have a problem with.  Its the secret cabal thats actually running the show directing the clearly feeble minded and dementia ridden Biden around.

 

[sho nuff]

You guys are acting as if hes the one in actually in charge and running things.

Its not Biden we nevessarily have a problem with.  Its the secret cabal thats actually running the show directing the clearly feeble minded and dementia ridden Biden around.

That communist cabal that could not get BBB passed? 

 

[shadrap]

Joe Biden has been in politics for our entire lives. He’s got a longer track record than any politician in Washington. He’s always been nothing other than a middle of the road milquetoast establishment lackey. He’s been the biggest gift to banking, Wall Street, the military and corporate capitalism of any politician in my lifetime. Wins an election and now he’s the second coming of Lenin. 

this made me laugh, in a good way.

 

[(HULK)]

IMHO if Biden runs in 2016 he wins and maybe is that, the problem is by 2020 Biden became a puppet of the rest of the Democratic party and their farther left agendas.

I gotta agree with this in principle. Biden was one of the rightmost Dems for a long time. But he ran on a lot of far left ideas. Thing is, he won on not-being-Trump more than the ideas he ran on.

 

[(HULK)]

I love the sentiment here, but I do wonder if it is even possible for a centrist to become President in the current climate.

I'm independent. I have held my nose in some elections, and in some elections I've be like, YOLO and voted Gary Johnson just because I couldn't even stand to hold my nose enough to pick between Hill and Trump.

I can't align with either party's platform, even before the Republicans stopped having a platform. I'm just an issue by issue guy. I think things like 'abortion is a social ill' and also things like 'we should adopt the European model of centralized health care'. I am against the death penalty. I am for the 2nd amendment (but do think we need to do something to address the level of gun violence in our country). I think cancel culture is just the worst. I think the rage against CRT is ridiculous. I believe in giving access to a good education to all of our children is one of the smartest things we can do. I think the money we spend on defense is mostly wasted and way too high. Basically, I'm all over the place, issue by issue. I try to give each issue actual thought. Unfortunately, that isn't how party politics work. And, even worse, we've denigrated into being so dang tribal, the individual issues have stopped mattering, it's just my team and your team.

I don't think I'm alone in wanting the tribalism trend to reverse. To get back to debating issues. To facts mattering far more than whichever team you're on. I have no friggin clue how to get to there from here though.

 

[Zow]

Biden was a moderate candidate for the Democrats. 

So was Hillary. She was adequately qualified and would have done an adequate job keeping the proverbial train moving while implementing at worst vanilla new policies. 

She was, unfortunately, just as likeable as a toenail with fungus. Which is why Trump was able to win despite getting about the same number of votes as Romney (Hillary didn't inspire anybody to come out and vote like Obama and she unfathomably somehow lost the white, religious, middle to upper middle class women vote). 

So, to the point of this thread, it would be a moderate candidate with moderate likeability. Which I attribute as positive traits to prior candidates such as John Kasich, Pete B, etc. that I would have thought people would have happily voted for.  Yet they got trounced in their primaries.

 

[Zow]

You guys are acting as if hes the one in actually in charge and running things.

Its not Biden we nevessarily have a problem with.  Its the secret cabal thats actually running the show directing the clearly feeble minded and dementia ridden Biden around.

Who is in this "secret cabal"?

 

[Zow]

IMHO if Biden runs in 2016 he wins and maybe is that, the problem is by 2020 Biden became a puppet of the rest of the Democratic party and their farther left agendas.

Which of these agendas has he actually instilled through law and/or policy?

 

[CletiusMaximus]

You guys are acting as if hes the one in actually in charge and running things.

Its not Biden we nevessarily have a problem with.  Its the secret cabal thats actually running the show directing the clearly feeble minded and dementia ridden Biden around.

I'm just responding to the question posed in the topic.  I agree no president or politician has any real power or desire to change anything.

 

[Rich Conway]

I love the sentiment here, but I do wonder if it is even possible for a centrist to become President in the current climate.

I'm independent. I have held my nose in some elections, and in some elections I've be like, YOLO and voted Gary Johnson just because I couldn't even stand to hold my nose enough to pick between Hill and Trump.

I can't align with either party's platform, even before the Republicans stopped having a platform. I'm just an issue by issue guy. I think things like 'abortion is a social ill' and also things like 'we should adopt the European model of centralized health care'. I am against the death penalty. I am for the 2nd amendment (but do think we need to do something to address the level of gun violence in our country). I think cancel culture is just the worst. I think the rage against CRT is ridiculous. I believe in giving access to a good education to all of our children is one of the smartest things we can do. I think the money we spend on defense is mostly wasted and way too high. Basically, I'm all over the place, issue by issue. I try to give each issue actual thought. Unfortunately, that isn't how party politics work. And, even worse, we've denigrated into being so dang tribal, the individual issues have stopped mattering, it's just my team and your team.

I don't think I'm alone in wanting the tribalism trend to reverse. To get back to debating issues. To facts mattering far more than whichever team you're on. I have no friggin clue how to get to there from here though.

To get there, we need multiple viable parties.  To accomplish that, we likely need proportional representation and/or ranked choice voting.  To implement those is going to be very difficult, as both of those are harmful to the two existing parties.

 

[Zow]

To get there, we need multiple viable parties.  To accomplish that, we likely need proportional representation and/or ranked choice voting.  To implement those is going to be very difficult, as both of those are harmful to the two existing parties.

Or we need to give varying weights to voter demographics and education. But, that obviously flies in the face of democracy, and I can't imagine many will be on board with their votes carrying less to no weight compared to others. 

But, Trump and the current inevitable status of the two-party system is exactly what Aristotle foresaw many centuries ago when he criticized democracy (or even a representative republic) as a sub-ideal form of government. 

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I'd argue that even on the typical political landscape that Trump was a moderate.  Not in the new Trumpism definition of conservative or right, but on the political spectrum we were working with up until 2015.  

And the entire premise of this thread is wrong.  When it comes to presidential candidates the moderate lose because they are the nominee.  The primaries (at least presidential) are skewed to nominating the moderate while the general election skews toward electing the candidate that excites the base.  

 

[belljr]

This may not be true here being a political forum but the vast majority of people I know IRL have held their noses when voting the last few elections because they don't support the far right that runs the Republican party or the far left that controls the Democratic party. The problem is you have little chance of getting nominated by either party without the support of the far fringes. Just going to use the Republicans as an example since the Dems currently control the Whitehouse. If they run Trump in 2024 maybe they win, maybe they don't but either way it will be by the skin of their teeth and the losing side will debate the results. If they ran a moderate Republican that was fiscally conservative, favored business but also was more liberal socially and more small business then big business favoritism I predict they would win with 65% or more in favor. Who else are the Trump supporters going to vote for and you pull back a bunch of people who voted Biden because of an utter disdain for Trump. Same  could have been said of the Democrats in 2016 if they would have run someone less polarizing and more moderate then Hillary they win easily. A George W. Bush or Bill Clinton type seems so far off the choices we are given today.

My preferred answer has always been a third party, a real third party that splits off from the others but that seems to be a pipe dream. And the current powers that be in the two parties we have seem to be happy to push more to the extreme and just trade the presidency back and forth every 4 to 8 years then actually try and evolve and win easily.

Many will tell you moderates don't exist..... it's just liberals pretending to not be liberal

 

[Zow]

Many will tell you moderates don't exist..... it's just liberals pretending to not be liberal

Many people will tell you that Nickelback is a good band, the Earth is flat, etc... doesn't make it so. 

 

[SwampDawg]

I'd argue that even on the typical political landscape that Trump was a moderate.  Not in the new Trumpism definition of conservative or right, but on the political spectrum we were working with up until 2015.  

And the entire premise of this thread is wrong.  When it comes to presidential candidates the moderate lose because they are the nominee.  The primaries (at least presidential) are skewed to nominating the moderate while the general election skews toward electing the candidate that excites the base.  

I disagree, I think the hard line party people turn out more during the primary and the primaries are often the party telling you which candidate is the best and they are usually controlled by the far right and far left. Plus for example I'm a registered Democrat but there is a moderate Republican I like I have no say in the primary since you can only vote registered party and if you are an independent you basically have no vote in a primary.

 

[SwampDawg]

Many will tell you moderates don't exist..... it's just liberals pretending to not be liberal

I would tell those people they are the problem. Much like @(HULK) above I'm an issue by issue guy, to me a moderate is someone who sees both sides and does what is best for the country even if that doesn't follow the party line all the time and can understand the other sides stance even if they don't agree.

 

[SwampDawg]

I'd argue that even on the typical political landscape that Trump was a moderate.  Not in the new Trumpism definition of conservative or right, but on the political spectrum we were working with up until 2015.  

And the entire premise of this thread is wrong.  When it comes to presidential candidates the moderate lose because they are the nominee.  The primaries (at least presidential) are skewed to nominating the moderate while the general election skews toward electing the candidate that excites the base.  

I think in 2000 Trump was playing at being a moderate when he was trying to get the Reform party nomination. This is just my personal opinion but I think Trump is whatever he thinks will help him get what he wants. He ran on draining the swamp changed that to hard right wing stance when he wanted the parties support, in the past he has supported both moderate and liberal ideas. Just because you have said things in support of all these ideas in order to get what you want doesn't make you a moderate, that just makes you a "me" guy and not a best for the team guy.

 

[Rich Conway]

Plus for example I'm a registered Democrat but there is a moderate Republican I like I have no say in the primary since you can only vote registered party and if you are an independent you basically have no vote in a primary.

This is actually a state by state thing.  Some states allow crossover votes in the primaries.

 

[(HULK)]

Or we need to give varying weights to voter demographics and education. But, that obviously flies in the face of democracy, and I can't imagine many will be on board with their votes carrying less to no weight compared to others. 

But, Trump and the current inevitable status of the two-party system is exactly what Aristotle foresaw many centuries ago when he criticized democracy (or even a representative republic) as a sub-ideal form of government. 

Votes already carry varying weight depending on which state they come from. For the Presidential election anyways.

I love the political system which grew this country over the past 2.5 centuries, but it isn't perfect and lately it's become increasingly clear that if we don't improve it some we may fall to shambles by the folks that got good at exploiting it.

 

[(HULK)]

I think in 2000 Trump was playing at being a moderate when he was trying to get the Reform party nomination. This is just my personal opinion but I think Trump is whatever he thinks will help him get what he wants. He ran on draining the swamp changed that to hard right wing stance when he wanted the parties support, in the past he has supported both moderate and liberal ideas. Just because you have said things in support of all these ideas in order to get what you want doesn't make you a moderate, that just makes you a "me" guy and not a best for the team guy.

Kinda a good take. Trump's ideology is neither left, nor right, nor moderate. It's literally "what is best for Donald Trump" and any other consideration is a non-factor.

 

[song]

Who is in this "secret cabal"?

he told you it's a secret.

pretty obviously it is extremely well funded organizations and individuals though.  and while they can and do have a myriad of individual interests, the over riding common interest is keeping things status quo so as to preserve their power and wealth.

that's why our national governance has generally always been moderate from my perspective, and given our current state of spiritual evolution, will remain so.

to put it more figuratively, we can change the brand, but will still be eating dog food.

 

[SwampDawg]

This is actually a state by state thing.  Some states allow crossover votes in the primaries.

Interesting, I've lived in one state since I was old enough to vote and did not realize that.  Seems like that should be a national standard one way or the other.  Why allow one state more say then another in a primary but all vote the same way in the general election.

 

[Rich Conway]

Interesting, I've lived in one state since I was old enough to vote and did not realize that.  Seems like that should be a national standard one way or the other.  Why allow one state more say then another in a primary but all vote the same way in the general election.

I don't think a lot of states allow it, but I know some do.  Some states (looking at you, Iowa) don't even have primary elections, but rather caucuses, which work entirely differently.

There's no national standard on the general election, either.  Every state has different rules for absentee, mail-in, registration, etc.  Nebraska and Maine are the only states where the electoral votes aren't winner-take-all.

 

[Zow]

Votes already carry varying weight depending on which state they come from. For the Presidential election anyways.

Agreed. But that's not the "weight" I'm talking about. 

 

[BladeRunner]

Agreed. But that's not the "weight" I'm talking about. 

Are you calling me fat? 

 

[Van Dyman]

I disagree, I think the hard line party people turn out more during the primary and the primaries are often the party telling you which candidate is the best and they are usually controlled by the far right and far left. Plus for example I'm a registered Democrat but there is a moderate Republican I like I have no say in the primary since you can only vote registered party and if you are an independent you basically have no vote in a primary.

That sounds like a closed primary. I'm sure that sucks, but most states aren't like that.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/primary-types.aspx

 

[Desert_Power]

I would say it would look a lot like when it just happened in 2020

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I think in 2000 Trump was playing at being a moderate when he was trying to get the Reform party nomination. This is just my personal opinion but I think Trump is whatever he thinks will help him get what he wants. He ran on draining the swamp changed that to hard right wing stance when he wanted the parties support, in the past he has supported both moderate and liberal ideas. Just because you have said things in support of all these ideas in order to get what you want doesn't make you a moderate, that just makes you a "me" guy and not a best for the team guy.

So lets ignore Trump 2016.

• 2020 moderate wannabe Trump versus lifetime moderate Biden
  
• 2016 Trump (not categorized) versus Third Way democrat Hillary  (i.e. not liberal.)
  
• 2012 Moderate Romney versus moderate Obama
  
• 2008 Maverick (ie claimed to be moderate) McCain versus moderate Obama
  
• 2004 Compassionate conservative (i.e. moderate) W versus "the most liberal member of the Senate" Kerry.  Except Kerry's label was nonsense
  
• 2000 W, even more moderate than he was in 2004 versus Gore who shifted to the Center to beat Bill Bradley - not W
  
• 1996 Dole the definition of establishment versus Third Way Democrat Clinton
  
• 1992 HW who gave up his conservative credentials and reverted to his moderate ways when he agreed to raise taxes versus Third Way Democrat Clinton
  
• 1988 HW a lifetime moderate ran as the conservative successor to Reagan versus the "anti ideology" candidate.
  
• 1984 Finally a non moderate (at least from the perspective of 1984) who governed much more "pragmatically" than "ideologically" but we will put Reagan as the extremist in this group against a legitimate (for the time) liberal Mondale.
  

Now maybe you'll disagree on my characterization on some of these.  Kerry and Dukakis being New England democrats maybe.   W was a wingnut.  Or whatever.  But I think overall the presidential races have nominated moderates.  And this is by design (at least on the democratic side) with the invention of Super Tuesday where conservative Southern state with some of the most moderate, even conservative democrats reside settling much of the race before the liberals even cast a vote.  On the GOP the next guy in line tends to moderate those nominations, with the note that the next guy in line almost never actually wins for the GOP.  The GOP elects the "no way in hell" they will actually win candidates and not the next guy up.  And with Clinton and Obama the democrats elected the "rising stars".

If you had stated that this is for House or other gerrymandered elections you may have a point.  But as a liberal I have only once had an actual liberal to vote for (among Democrats) president since turning 18 in 1982, and I chose "non of the above" that time around (by mistake, not in protest).   This idea that moderates or those in the center are left out is simply unsupportable by the names above.

 

[The Dude]

We need a radical ticket - like a top moderate GOP as President and a top moderate Dem as VP (or flipped) - and work for the country not their party.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Romney and Obama were both moderates, and they were both cast as The Greatest Villains In American History by the time the campaign was over. 

I remember Joe Biden telling his black base that Romney would put them "back in chains".

 

[(HULK)]

We need a radical ticket - like a top moderate GOP as President and a top moderate Dem as VP (or flipped) - and work for the country not their party.

John McCain intended to pick Joe Liberman as his running mate. Unfortunately, that part of the GOP that keeps getting more and more extreme and dumb threatened to floor vote the nomination away from him if he didn't pick Palin. I think it was the Tea Party Caucus back then... same folks making up MAGA Murica now.