Who was the last Washington insider to defeat an incumbent?

[Walt Starr]

It certainly has not occurred during my lifetime.

At first I thought it was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, but he was a New York politician and not a Washington insider.

I'm searching, but I know I need to go a lot further back, possibly even to the 19th century.

Can any DUer tell me who was the last Washington insider to defeat an incumbent?

[jjmalonejr]

1. John F. Kennedy

Not that long ago.

Now John F. Kerry's going to do it. Love those Massachusetts liberals!

[Walt Starr]

3. Kennedy was not running against an incumbent president

He was running against a vice president.

Big difference.

[jjmalonejr]

4. You're right.

I still love those Massachusetts liberals!

[Walt Starr]

2. Okay, the most recent time I can come up with is

Abraham Lincoln.

Is there any example of a Washington insider defeating an incumbent that is newer than Lincoln?

[LBJBestEver]

5. I think there will be alot of "firsts" with this election. <nm>

[Walt Starr]

7. Okay, who was the last Senator to defeat an incumbent president?

Um, Lincoln again?

[LBJBestEver]

8. I think there will be alot of "firsts" with this election. <nm>

[Zomby Woof]

35. Lincoln was never a senator

Some years before, he served ONE term in the House, and returned to law practice in Illinois afterwards. He held no office when elected.

[MoonRiver]

22. And with the 2000 one.

First time a US Supreme Court defied the Constitution and chose our president. Not a good sign for the future of our country. But after that first, anything can happen.

[jjmalonejr]

6. When's the last time a doctor defeated an incumbent?

Gee, I can't think of one.

(I'm just teasing you here, by the way. I get your point, but I think every election is different and almost anything is possible).

[Walt Starr]

9. A doctor is certainly an outsider

Who was it that was the last outsider to defeat an incumbent?

Oh yeah, that would be Reagan.

Carter was the one before him.

Roosevelt before him.

I'm seeing some major patterns here.

[beaconess]

13. Roosevelt was not an outsider

Yes, he had been a governor, but he was also a deeply entrenched member of the Washington establishment.

But jjmalone's point is well taken. While everyone who beat an incumbent president had the fact that they were outsiders in common, it cannot be assumed that that is the primary reason that they were successful.

[Walt Starr]

15. Nope, he was an outsider

He was not a Senator of Congressman. Nor was he a secretary of anything.

Governors are always outsiders.

[beaconess]

18. He was Secretary of the Navy

not to mention nephew-in-law of a president, cousin of the Speaker of the House, and one of the most respected members of the Washington establishment. He was NOT an outsider.

[Walt Starr]

21. Not when he ran

Governors are Washington outsiders.

[beaconess]

24. Wow - what a concept

So if Ted Kennedy left the Senate after 40 years and became governor of Massachusetts for two years, he would be, by your definition, a Washington Outsider?

Interesting.

[Walt Starr]

25. Apples and oranges

Come up with a better analogy.

[NoPasaran]

10. Lincoln did not defeat an incumbant

The sitting President was James Buchanan

Lincoln faced Douglas, Breckenridge and Bell

I don't think it has ever happened.

[beaconess]

11. How many times has a Washington Insider RUN against an

incumbent president?

Mondale vs. Reagan 1984
Goldwater vs. Johnson 1964
Adlai Stevenson v. Eisenhower 1956

I don't think that any of these people lost to the incumbent because they were insiders. Their "insider" status was the least of their problems. Their major impediment is that they were running against hugely popular presidents.

This year's election is an entirely different situation.

[not systems]

17. Dole vs Clinton. n/t

[beaconess]

19. Forgot him. Thanks.

[La_Serpiente]

12. Chester A. Arthur

President, 1881-1885

He was the Incumbent Republican President at the time.

Here is one reason why he did not get the nomination:

Arthur demonstrated as President that he was above factions within the Republican Party, if indeed not above the party itself. Perhaps in part his reason was the well-kept secret he had known since a year after he succeeded to the Presidency, that he was suffering from a fatal kidney disease. He kept himself in the running for the Presidential nomination in 1884 in order not to appear that he feared defeat, but was not renominated, and died in 1886. Publisher Alexander K. McClure recalled, "No man ever entered the Presidency so profoundly and widely distrusted, and no one ever retired ... more generally respected."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/ca21.html

I have also found an alternative reason:

Arthur naturally hoped that the Republicans would nominate him in 1884. But as he had the support neither of the reform wing nor of the party bosses, his candidacy became an idle hope. On the first BALLOT he had 278 votes against frontrunner James G. Blaine's 33412, but on the fourth ballot the prize was Blaine's, with 541 votes against Arthur's 207. Blaine lost the election to Grover Cleveland.

http://gi.grolier.com/presidents/ea/bios/21parth.html

James Blaine, however, was the Secretary of State.

That is your example of a Washington Insider, a fmr. Secretary of State, defeating an incumbent president for the nomination of the Republican party in 1884.

[David Zephyr]

14. Very, Very Interesting Observation, Walt.

It would be FDR taking out the incumbent Hoover.

I've never thought of this before. Pretty stark little factoid you've come up with.

:hi:

Also, like you, my Dean vote and support would be transferrable to Clark or Kucinich. But that's it.

[Walt Starr]

16. Ahhh, but FDR was governor of New York when he ran against Hoover

making ever FDR an outsider!

The more I delve, the more it appears that this has never happened.

Should an insider be nominated, I guarantee this point will be pushed time and again to build up the inevitability factor.

[beaconess]

23. He was clearly an insider

Do you believe that the only thing that qualifies one as a Washington Insider is that they currently serve as a Senator, Congressman or Secretary?

That would mean that W wasn't an insider - which he clearly was, his attempts at playing the good ole boy outsider notwithstanding. And his father wasn't an insider when he first ran, according to your standard.

That would also mean that the Washington lobbyists aren't insiders. Nor is Newt Gingrich or Al Gore or any former Congressman or Senator.

[Walt Starr]

26. W was NOT an insider

and ran as an OUTSIDER!

Go back and look, he ran as a Washington outsider!!!

[beaconess]

28. He RAN as an outsider, but he's the ultimate insider

unless you think that the son of a president, the grandson of a Senator who was connected out the wazoo is some kind of an outsider just because his connections bought him a governorship.

Yet, on the other hand, a man who spent his entire life outside of Washington working for a living becomes a Washington insider by virtue of spending less than 6 years as a Senator.

Obviously, your definition of an outsider is very broad. And you seem to think that 20 years of working in the real world far away from Washington is insufficient to innoculate anyone from being completely besmirched with insideritis as soon as they set foot in DC. but a few years doing nothing in state government is more than sufficient to remove all traces of the disease.

An interesting concept.

That being said, I think your theory is an interesting one and I don't discount it completely. But it also is a bit simplistic and doesn't take into account the unique aspects of each election season, as well as the individuals who are running against one another.

[Walt Starr]

30. It doesn;t matter, he ran as an outsider

and the electorate considered him an outsider.

[k_blagburn]

20. Grover Cleveland 1892

In 1892, after four years of Republican leadership, Cleveland won against Harrison, who had alienated ethnic voters in the Midwest, possibly due to his support for temperance. Cleveland became the only President to come back from defeat and be reelected after losing the office.

[Walt Starr]

27. I think you've found it!!!

So maybe we should be running Gore?

:shrug:

Wow, didn't Harrison lose the popular vote but win the electoral college through some funky SCOTUS shenanigans?

We are running the WRONG guy!

[milkyway]

29. I think Al Gore is, by far, the best Dem to beat Bush. He would soundly

beat him today, tomorrow, and in November.

[MoonRiver]

32. We SHOULD be running Gore. Unfortunately Gore doesn't agree.

Aside from that my take is that Wes Clark has the best chance to beat *, and lead our country out of these dark times.

[Walt Starr]

33. Clark would stand a hell of a better chance than an insider

An insider is a non-starter in this race, IMO.

Only one of the outsider candidates can win it, IMO.

[MoonRiver]

34. self-deleted

[question everything]

40. Al Gore should have not run in 2000

and, perhaps, he could have run now.

Papa Bush is the only sitting V.P. who was directly elected to a president and lasted only one term.

Why? Because for four or eight years you have a person who is barely heard or noticed. This person is sitting quietly, letting the president run the county, taking all the limelight.

All of a sudden, this person is going to prove that s/he can be an active chief executive?

Had Gore not run in 2000, and Bush still won, he could have run now after spending the last four years showing us what he can do.

This should be the message for any future V.Ps.

[bornskeptic]

31. One time nobody's mentioned,

VP Jefferson defeated incumbent Adams in 1800.

[Zomby Woof]

36. and it had to be thrown into the House

In fact, if it wasn't for the 3/5ths compromise, Jefferson wouldn't have received enough electoral votes to cause a tie, and a vote in the House. The south boosted its electoral totals because slaves counted as 3/5ths of a person, with none of the rights. Jefferson rode into office on the backs of slaves.

It would have been fascinating had Aaron Burr become president instead. He became VP, and hated by both Jefferson, and their mutual rival, Alexander Hamilton. Then 3 years later, Burr killed Hamilton in a duel, and eventually was accused in a conspiracy to seize the western territories and wrestle them from the U.S. by Jefferson. Jefferson had an obsessive hatred for Burr.

[adamrsilva]

37. Hasn't happened for a LONG time

Which is why we should go with Gov. Dean or Gen. Clark.

[HuckleB]

38. This is a matter of some concern.

What about the political culture of the U.S. has maintained a string of presidents whose origins lay outside of service in D.C.

Will this factor continue to play a role? If so, how much of a role? If not, what has changed in this nation so that it no longer is a factor?

[mitchum]

39. Deleted by mitchum for the sake of sanity

because, really...
what's the fucking use?