I knew it; Republican primary voters think they are required to vote for the loser from the last cycle on future nominations. They need help with new candidates’ names.
They do that a lot, but it isn’t loser from last time, it’s just who has been around a long time, what Republican is well known and seemingly solid and reliable.
Mitt Romney really isn’t well known. Yes, he did lose last time, but Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee both stayed in the race longer. Mitt got tired of spending his own money and dropped out before Huckabee did. And Ron Paul stayed till the end, because his people kept spending money even though he wasn’t going to win. Ron wasn’t really spending much at the end either.
There’s no reason Romney should get that “old republican everyone knows”. Gingrich has more of a claim than Romney.
Paul has at least as much as Romney.
And Palin should have it, but the media doesn’t like her.
But she is the one, not Romney, who was the VP nominee, when more people were paying attention than when Romney was losing.
Lost Nom Before - McCain (Paul, Huckabee, Romney)
Famous name - Bush
Losing VP - Dole
VP - Bush
Lost Nom Before - Reagan
VP - Ford
Lost gen Before - Nixon
none of the above - Goldwater (memory getting fuzzy here)
VP - Nixon
That’s good enough.
Famous name - Any Bush, Any Reagan, other famous names? Romney has a tiny bit of that from his dad.
VP - Cheney, Quayle
Losing VP - Palin
Lost nomination - a huge list - Paul, Huck, Mitt, Rudy from 2008. But also go back to 2000, and to 1996.
Dole’s VP run and his getting the nomination were 20 years apart. How old is Pat Buchanan?
lost general - mccain dole