Initially McCain was the frontrunner for the 2008 Republican nomination. Than his support collapsed.

[Tom Rinaldo]

IT IS TOO EARLY TO WRITE OFF ANY MAJOR CANDIDATE OR TO ASCRIBE WINNING MOMENTUM TO ANYONE.

Consider the Republican race for the 2008 nomination.

"McCain began the campaign as the apparent frontrunner among Republicans, with a strategy of appearing as the establishment, inevitable candidate; his campaign website featured an Associated Press article describing him as "[a] political celebrity"

"By a few weeks prior to making his announcement on Letterman, McCain was already beginning to trail behind former Mayor of New York City Rudy Giuliani in the polls, a situation attributed to his steadfast support for the Iraq War troop surge of 2007.

In March 2007, with considerable press attention and in hopes of reigniting his efforts, McCain brought back the "Straight Talk Express" campaign bus that he had used to much positive effect in his outsider run in 2000."

"....by July 2007 his campaign was forced to restructure its size and operations."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain_2008_presidential_campaign

And how many temporary "frontrunnerss" did the Republicans cycle through in 2012? Remember Michelle Bachmann, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum etc. etc. etc.?

I don't care if we consider the prospects of Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren of Kamala Harris, Beto O'Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, or even Steve Bullock. A single exchange in a single debate can move the needle up or down for anyone, and then that needle can swing again in a subsequent debate. And none of that factors in what will happen when those who like a particular candidate now are forced to move onto supporting another one when their first chosen choice is eliminated.

Any Democratic candidate for President with an at least modest national profile, some ability to raise money for their Presidential campaign, and continued inclusion in the national Democratic Party debates can still either rise or fall, in or out of contention. It all is fluid and will remain so for quite awhile.

[JI7]

1. in 2008 and 2012 the 'moderates' of the party United behind

mccain and Romney. while the crazies split the vote .

the democratic primary is different. i don't really go by what happened with Republicans because the democratic side is more complex and most candidates are decent.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. The profile of those who lock in early to presieential politics from those who don't

differs significantly, regardless of political parties. And the numbers of those who don't bother really tuning in before the winter preceding a Presidential election year dwarfs those who are following the races that intently during the Spring and Summer. The first districts reporting results in an actual election seldom reflect how the percentages will end up once the bulk of vote tallies start flooding in. In 2004 Wes Clark was almost a complete unknown to Democratic voters, and not a candidate for President at this point in the calendar. By late fall he was arguably the frontrunner. Then his campaign went off track and he went into a nose dive, then he rallied some what and stabilized, winning one primary and coming in second in some others, though he never regained lost altitude.

Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter came from virtually nowhere to win their nominations etc. Joe Lieberman was the frontrunner at this stage in 2004. Hillary was the overwhelming favorite at this stage in 2008 etc.

[marylandblue]

2. You are right, but people will find reasons to ignore history.

Every election is different so they will always find a reason to ignore any prior pattern and go back on the polling roller coaster.

[TwilightZone]

4. The same John McCain that won the nomination?

I'm not sure you're making the point you think you're making. It's true that early front-runners don't always win, but you've chosen a rather poor example of making that point.

[Tom Rinaldo]

5. I made that choice intentionally

It is easy to point to people who were early favorites, like Joe Lieberman and Rudy Giuliani, who then faded from contention, because that happens all the time. That's why some seem so eager to believe that when a front runner starts to lose some support that the end may be in sight for them. Already that type speculation is going on about Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders for example. McCain is the obvious recent case illustrating that an early frontrunner can really actually collapse, and then STILL rebound later to win the nomination.

My point isn't only about frontrunners, it is about very fluid and unpredictable nature of contests at this point in the cycle.