DOCSLIB.ORG

Iowa Caucus Results

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Iowa Caucus Results ELECTIONS 377 CAUCUS RESULTS Democrats Note: Delegate strength figures are projections by the Iowa Democratic Party of the percentage of state convention delegates each candidate controlled as a result of strength shown at the caucuses. In 1972 and 1976, the Iowa Democratic Party also projected the national delegates won based on the strength shown at the caucuses. In 1984 and 1988, the News Election Service (N.E.S.) also conducted straw polls. Since both the Iowa Democratic Party and N.E.S. results depend on volunteer reporting, the results are never complete. In 1992, a N.E.S. straw poll was not conducted. In all years, information was never reported from some precincts. 1972 Delegate Strength National Delegates Won Uncommitted ......................................................... 35.8% ................................................................18 Edmund Muskie .................................................... 35.5% ................................................................18 George McGovern ................................................ 22.6% ................................................................10 Others .................................................................... ....7%.............................................................. .0 Hubert Humphrey ................................................ 1.6% ..................................................................0 Eugene McCarthy ................................................ 1.4% ...................................................................0 Shirley Chisholm .................................................. 1.3% ...................................................................0 Henry Jackson ...................................................... 1.1% ................................................................... 0 1976 Delegate Strength National Delegates Won Uncommitted ......................................................... 37.2% ................................................................ 18 Jimmy Carter ........................................................ 27.6% ................................................................ 13 Birch Bayh ............................................................. 13.2% .................................................................. 6 Fred Harris ............................................................ 9.9% .................................................................. 5 Morris Udall ........................................................... 6.0% .................................................................. 3 Sargent Shriver .................................................... 3.3% ................................................................. 2 Others .................................................................... 1.8% .................................................................. 0 Henry Jackson ...................................................... 1.1% .................................................................. 0 1980 Delegate Strength Jimmy Carter ........................................................ 59.1% Edward Kennedy .................................................. 31.2% Uncommitted ......................................................... 9.6% 1984 Delegate Strength N.E.S. Straw Poll Walter Mondale ..................................................... 48.9% ..........................................................44.5% Gary Hart ............................................................... 16.5% ..........................................................14.8% George McGovern ................................................ 10.3% ..........................................................12.6% Uncommitted ......................................................... 9.4% ............................................................7.5% Alan Cranston ....................................................... 7.4% ............................................................9.0% John Glenn ............................................................ 3.5% ............................................................5.3% Reuben Askew ...................................................... 2.5% ............................................................3.3% Jesse Jackson ........................................................ 1.5% ............................................................2.7% Ernest Hollings ..................................................... 0.0% ............................................................0.3% 1988 Delegate Strength N.E.S. Straw Poll Richard Gephardt ................................................. 31.3% .........................................................27.4% Paul Simon ............................................................. 26.7% ..........................................................24.3% Michael Dukakis ................................................... 22.2% ..........................................................20.5% Jesse Jackson ........................................................ 8.8% ..........................................................11.1% Bruce Babbitt ........................................................ 6.1% ............................................................9.2% Uncommitted ......................................................... 4.5% ............................................................6.0% Gary Hart ............................................................... 0.3%........................................................... 1.0% Albert Gore ............................................................ 0.0% ...........................................................0.2% 378 IOWA OFFICIAL REGISTER 1992 Delegate Strength Tom Harkin .......................................................... 76.4% Uncommitted ........................................................ 11.9% Paul Tsongas......................................................... 4.1% Bill Clinton ............................................................ 2.8% Bob Kerrey ........................................................... 2.4% Jerry Brown ......................................................... 1.6% Others ................................................................... .6% 1996 No preference polls conducted because President Clinton was unopposed for renomination. Republicans The 1976 results are of a straw poll of 62 sample precincts conducted by the Republican Party of Iowa. Figures for 1980 are straw poll results from the caucuses conducted by the Republican Party of Iowa. No figures are provided for 1984 because incumbent President Ronald Reagan faced no opposition for his party’s nomination. Figures for 1988 are straw poll results from the caucuses conducted by News Election Service (N.E.S.) Since both the Republican Party of Iowa and N.E.S. results depend on volunteer reporting, the results are never complete. In 1980 and 1988, information was never reported from some precincts. 1976 Straw Poll of Sample Precincts Gerald Ford ............................................................... 264 Ronald Reagan ......................................................... 248 Undecided ................................................................... 62 Others ........................................................................... 9 1980 Republican Party of Iowa Straw Poll George Bush........................................................33,530 ......................................................... 31.6% Ronald Reagan ....................................................31,348 ......................................................... 29.5% Howard Baker .....................................................16,216 ......................................................... 15.3% John Connally ....................................................... 9,861 ........................................................... 9.3% Phil Crane .............................................................. 7,135 ........................................................... 6.7% John Anderson ...................................................... 4,585 ........................................................... 4.3% No Preference ....................................................... 1,800 ........................................................... 1.7% Robert Dole............................................................ 1,576 ........................................................... 1.5% 1988 N.E.S. Straw Poll Robert Dole..........................................................40,661 ......................................................... 37.4% Pat Robertson ......................................................26,761 ......................................................... 24.6% George Bush........................................................20,194 ......................................................... 18.6% Jack Kemp ...........................................................12,088 ......................................................... 11.1% Pete DuPont .......................................................... 7,999 ........................................................... 7.3% No Preference .......................................................... 739 ........................................................... 0.7% Alexander Haig ......................................................... 364 ..........................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Iowa Democratic Party 2016 Precinct Caucus Guide
    Iowa Democratic Party 2016 Precinct Caucus Guide The following is a step-by-step guide for caucus night. An additional guide will be printed for caucus chairs, which will provide a further in-depth discussion of all procedures and reporting of caucus activities. If you have questions concerning the procedures contained in this caucus guide, please contact the Iowa Democratic Party at 515-244-7292. Paid for by the Iowa Democratic Party www.iowademocrats.org and not authorized by any federal candidate or candidate’s committee . Produced in-house Monday, February 1, 2016 – 7:00PM Doors open 6:30PM Who Can Participate in the Caucuses? In order to participate in the Iowa Democratic Party’s First-in-the-Nation Caucuses, you must meet the following qualifications: • Be a resident of Iowa and of the precinct in which you wish to participate • Be a U.S. citizen and otherwise eligible voter (18 years old by November 8, 2016) • Register as a Democrat* (you can register at the caucus) • Be in the registration line or signed in by 7:00pm Those who do not meet the above qualifications are allowed to remain at the caucus as an observer. *Iowans who will be 18 years old by Election Day, November 8, 2016, can participate in the caucuses; however, one cannot register to vote in Iowa until he/she is at least 17 ½ years old. Because the caucuses are held February 1, 2016, it is possible an eligible 2016 voter won’t be able to register as a Democrat by February 1, in which case the eligible voter must declare himself/herself a Democrat by signing a form with the Iowa Democratic Party.
    [Show full text]
  • S:\OHP\Tames, George Oral History\Tamespreface.Wpd
    George Tames Washington Photographer for the New York Times PREFACE In 1846, an unknown cameraman took the first photograph of the United States Capitol, a view of the East Front. Thereafter the Capitol, from all angles, became the subject of countless amateur and professional photographers. During the nineteenth century and well into the twentieth most photography took place outside the building, due both to its dimly lit interior and to the antipathy many committee chairmen felt about the distractions of flash powder and bulbs. Eventually, photographers moved into the building, shooting everywhere at will, except within the Senate and House chambers. By the 1980s, television cameras penetrated even this haven. Nearly a century after that first photo, George Tames began photographing the people and events of Capitol Hill, first for Time-Life and later for the New York Times. During the course of a long career that ranged from the 1940s through the 1980s, Tames developed access to, and captured the likenesses of more significant members of Congress, and had his work reproduced more widely in influential publications than any other photographer in American political history. He developed a style contrary to the "herd instinct" that led other photographers to group together outside a closed door waiting for a standard shot. Instead, his pictures demonstrate an artistic eye, an intense sense of place, and a special intimacy with his subjects. George Tames was born in the shadow of the Capitol Dome, in a Washington alley house on January 21, 1919, into a Greek-Albanian immigrant family, and "born into the Democratic party" as well.
    [Show full text]
  • (TRAP). One Aspect of That Program Was a Nationwide Petitior^^Drive
    cp^ws from The Conservative Caucus National Headquarters 7111 Leesburg Pike Falls Church, Virginia 22043 (703) 893-1550 Project Office 47 West Street Boston, Massachusetts 02111 (617) 426-7188 ■ .i-. - )■;. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE For further information please contact: Larry Woldt (703) 893-1550 THE CONSERVATIVE CAUCUS CALLS FOR A BALANCED • BUDGET AND TAX CUTS F. Andy Messing, Executive Director of The Conservative Caucus CTCC), today said, "Contrary to what some in government would like us to believe, the people of this country demand a balanced budget and tax cuts." -v: r.'T' Speaking at a joint press conference in the Capitol with Congress man Samuel Devine, Chairman of the House Republican Conference and a member of TCC's National Advisory Board, Messing added, "Earlier this year The Conservative Caucus launched our 'Tax Reduction Action Plan' (TRAP). One aspect of that program was a nationwide petitior^^drive. Today we are proceeding to send President Carter more than 40,000 peti tions collected by The Conservative Caucus from angry taxpayers nation wide. I think it is appropriate that we are taking this action on April 15. The American people are tired of footing the bill by paying higher taxes and higher prices to quench the appetite of Members of Congress and an Administration that refuses to put a lid on federal spending, clean up a bloated bureaucracy and eliminate the over-regulation of our free enterprise system—the real causes of inflation." Messing continued, "At the same time of the petition drive TCC was polling more than 33,000 taxpayers from all over America asking them whether they wanted to 'increase', 'maintain' current levels; or 'decrease' government control over the spending of their tax dollars in 15 separate issue areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement on the Death of Representative Julian C. Dixon The
    Administration of William J. Clinton, 2000 / Dec. 9 So I’m going to try to be a good citizen, good years, but if we build on it instead of and I’m going to try to help work on the things reverse it, it’s just going to get better. that I worked on as President as a private citizen But keep in mind, I will say again: It’s more but to do it in a way that doesn’t get under important that the people be pushing toward foot of the next President. And I have loved tomorrow than who has a particular office. As doing this. But the most important thing is that long as we’re open to the proposition we have people like you stay active in our party and to keep working; and we have to keep working keep pushing us to be thinking about tomorrow. together; everybody counts; everybody deserves Just keep pushing us toward the future, keep a chance; we all do better when we work to- moving, and keep reaching out like a magnet. gether. That’s what the Democrats believe, and And again, I would like to thank Ben. I would if we keep doing it, we’re going to be just fine. like to thank Bob Kerrey for the 8 years that Thank you, and God bless you. we have worked together, President and Sen- ator, and the many years of friendship before that. I want to thank Peter Hoagland, who came down from Washington with us today, for the NOTE: The President spoke at 3:38 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Openlands Annual Luncheon Honoring U.S. Senator Dick Durbin
    Openlands Annual Luncheon 21 20 Honoring U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois Ambassador Fay Hartog-Levin (Ret.) and Commissioner Debra Shore, Co-Chairs Anne Roosevelt, Honorary Chair Thursday, October 14, 2021 Hilton Chicago 720 S. Michigan Avenue 10:30 am to Noon: Networking Reception Noon to 1:30 pm: Lunch and Program Join Openlands for the 2021 Annual Luncheon honoring U.S. Senator Dick Durbin’s environmental legacy and the power that each of us has to make change through civic engagement. From ensuring clean air and water to protecting vital landscapes and supporting new green jobs for a healthier, more climate resilient future, the Senator’s passion for the environment is inspiring. Consistently the largest gathering of the conservation community in the state of Illinois, the Openlands Annual Luncheon recognizes the achievements of environmental leaders in our region and celebrates the importance of conservation and environmental stewardship locally, nationally, and internationally. 2021 CONSERVATION LEADERSHIP AWARD RECIPIENT: U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, a Democrat from Springfield, is the 47th U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois, the state’s senior senator, and the convener of Illinois’ bipartisan congressional delegation. Durbin also serves as the Senate Majority Whip, the second highest ranking position among the Senate Democrats, and has been elected to this leadership post by his Democratic colleagues every two years since 2005. Durbin is a member of the Appropriations Committee, where he advocates for federal priorities and projects important to Illinois, including significant funding to protect the Great Lakes and Chicago’s Lake Michigan shoreline, and investments in clean energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Electoral College Reform: Contemporary Issues for Congress
    Electoral College Reform: Contemporary Issues for Congress Updated October 6, 2017 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R43824 Electoral College Reform: Contemporary Issues for Congress Summary The electoral college method of electing the President and Vice President was established in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution and revised by the Twelfth Amendment. It provides for election of the President and Vice President by electors, commonly referred to as the electoral college. A majority of 270 of the 538 electoral votes is necessary to win. For further information on the modern-day operation of the college system, see CRS Report RL32611, The Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections, by Thomas H. Neale. The electoral college has been the subject of criticism and proposals for reform since before 1800. Constitutional and structural criticisms have centered on several of its features: (1) although today all electors are chosen by the voters in the presidential election, it is claimed to be not fully democratic, since it provides indirect election of the President; (2) it can lead to the election of candidates who win the electoral college but fewer popular votes than their opponents, or to contingent election in Congress if no candidate wins an electoral college majority; (3) it results in electoral vote under- and over-representation for some states between censuses; and (4) “faithless” electors can vote for candidates other than those they were elected to support. Legislative and political criticisms include (1) the general ticket system, currently used in all states except Maine and Nebraska, which is alleged to disenfranchise voters who prefer the losing candidates in the states; (2) various asserted “biases” that are alleged to favor different states and groups; and (3) the electoral college “lock,” which has been claimed to provide an electoral college advantage to both major parties at different times.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Election Commission 1 2 First General Counsel's
    MUR759900019 1 FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 2 3 FIRST GENERAL COUNSEL’S REPORT 4 5 MUR 7304 6 DATE COMPLAINT FILED: December 15, 2017 7 DATE OF NOTIFICATIONS: December 21, 2017 8 DATE LAST RESPONSE RECEIVED September 4, 2018 9 DATE ACTIVATED: May 3, 2018 10 11 EARLIEST SOL: September 10, 2020 12 LATEST SOL: December 31, 2021 13 ELECTION CYCLE: 2016 14 15 COMPLAINANT: Committee to Defend the President 16 17 RESPONDENTS: Hillary Victory Fund and Elizabeth Jones in her official capacity as 18 treasurer 19 Hillary Rodham Clinton 20 Hillary for America and Elizabeth Jones in her official capacity as 21 treasurer 22 DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee and 23 William Q. Derrough in his official capacity as treasurer 24 Alaska Democratic Party and Carolyn Covington in her official 25 capacity as treasurer 26 Democratic Party of Arkansas and Dawne Vandiver in her official 27 capacity as treasurer 28 Colorado Democratic Party and Rita Simas in her official capacity 29 as treasurer 30 Democratic State Committee (Delaware) and Helene Keeley in her 31 official capacity as treasurer 32 Democratic Executive Committee of Florida and Francesca Menes 33 in her official capacity as treasurer 34 Georgia Federal Elections Committee and Kip Carr in his official 35 capacity as treasurer 36 Idaho State Democratic Party and Leroy Hayes in his official 37 capacity as treasurer 38 Indiana Democratic Congressional Victory Committee and Henry 39 Fernandez in his official capacity as treasurer 40 Iowa Democratic Party and Ken Sagar in his official capacity as 41 treasurer 42 Kansas Democratic Party and Bill Hutton in his official capacity as 43 treasurer 44 Kentucky State Democratic Central Executive Committee and M.
    [Show full text]
  • 153682NCJRS.Pdf
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. .. .; J , ..~. .;"~ • .' ~ .~ _... '> .' UJ.l.IU.ll Calendar No. 605 102n CONGRESS REPORT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 102-1070 • ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR 1991 REPORT OF THE • SELECT COMMITTEE ON NARCOTICS ABUSE AND CONTROL ONE HUNDRED SECOND CONGRESS FIRST SESSION SCNAC-102-1-14 N'CJRS ACQUISITKON,; Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control U.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE • o WASHINGTON : 1992 :au • SELECI' COMMITTEE ON NARCOTICS ABUSE AND CONTROL (102D CoNGRESS) CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York, Chairman JACK BROOKS, Texas LAWRENCE COUGHLIN, Pennsylvania FORTNEY H. (PETE) STARK, California BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York JAMES H. SCHEUER, New York MICHAEL G. OXLEY, Ohio CARDISS COLLINS, TIlinois F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., FRANK J. GUARINI, New Jersey Wisconsin DANTE B. FASCELL, Florida ROBERT K. DORNAN, California WILLIAM J. HUGHES, New Jersey TOM LEWIS, Florida • MEL LEVINE, California JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma SOWMON P. ORTIZ, Texas WALLY HERGER, California LAWRENCE J. SMITH, Florida CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut EDOLPHUS "ED" TOWNS, New York BILL PAXON, New York JAMES A. TRAFICANT, JR., Ohio WILLIAM F. CLINGER, JR., Pennsylvania KWEISI MFUME, Maryland HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina NITA M. WWEY, New York PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey JIM RAMSTAD, Minnesota ROMANO L. MAZZOLI, Kentucky RON DE LUGO, Virgin Islands GEORGE J. HOCHBRUECKNER, New York CRAIG A. WASHINGTON, Texas ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey COMMI'ITEE STAFF EDWARD H. JURlTH, Staff Director P&'rER J. CoNIGLIO, Minority Staff Director (Ill 153682 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice .
    [Show full text]
  • ("DSCC") Files This Complaint Seeking an Immediate Investigation by the 7
    COMPLAINT BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION CBHMISSIOAl INTRODUCTXON - 1 The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee ("DSCC") 7-_. J _j. c files this complaint seeking an immediate investigation by the 7 c; a > Federal Election Commission into the illegal spending A* practices of the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee (WRSCIt). As the public record shows, and an investigation will confirm, the NRSC and a series of ostensibly nonprofit, nonpartisan groups have undertaken a significant and sustained effort to funnel "soft money101 into federal elections in violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended or "the Act"), 2 U.S.C. 5s 431 et seq., and the Federal Election Commission (peFECt)Regulations, 11 C.F.R. 85 100.1 & sea. 'The term "aoft money" as ueed in this Complaint means funds,that would not be lawful for use in connection with any federal election (e.g., corporate or labor organization treasury funds, contributions in excess of the relevant contribution limit for federal elections). THE FACTS IN TBIS CABE On November 24, 1992, the state of Georgia held a unique runoff election for the office of United States Senator. Georgia law provided for a runoff if no candidate in the regularly scheduled November 3 general election received in excess of 50 percent of the vote. The 1992 runoff in Georg a was a hotly contested race between the Democratic incumbent Wyche Fowler, and his Republican opponent, Paul Coverdell. The Republicans presented this election as a %ust-win81 election. Exhibit 1. The Republicans were so intent on victory that Senator Dole announced he was willing to give up his seat on the Senate Agriculture Committee for Coverdell, if necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Hearings in 1990
    S. Ho. 101-939, Pt. 2 WOMEN AND VIOLENCE HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FIRST CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON LEGISLATION TO REDUCE THE GROWING PROBLEM OF VIOLENT CRIME AGAINST WOMEN AUGUST 29 AND DECEMBER 11, 1990 Part 2 Serial No. J-101-80 Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary U.S. GOVERNMENT PRIUNTINO OFICE 88-468 WABHINGTON : 1991 For sale by the Superintendent of Documenta, Congressional Sales Office U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 V ~-F~ COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware, Chairman EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 8TROM THURMOND, South Carolina HOWARD M. MZTZENBAUM, Ohio ORRIN 0. HATCH, Utah DENNIS DxONCINI, Arizona ALAN K. SIMPSON, Wyoming PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont CHARGE& ORASSLEY, Iowa HOWELL HEFIN, Alabama ARLEN SPECE1R, Pennsylvania PAUL SIMON, Illinois GORDON J. HUMPHREY, New Hampshire HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin RoNAW A. KeN, Chief Counsl DIANA Hwrvuu, Staff Director J"nny J. PsOK, Oeneral Counwl Tnv L. Woom, Minority Chief Counstl and Staff Director CONTENTS Hearings held: Page Women and Violence, Wednesday, August 29, 1990 .......................................... 1 Violence Against Women: Domestic Violence, Tuesday, December 11, 1990 .........................................................................................................................88 STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS Biden, Hon. Joseph R., a U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware .................. 1, 88 Thurmond, Hon. Strom, a U.S. Senator from the State of South Carolina ......... 86 Grassley, Hon. Charles E., a U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa ........................ 182 CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES WEDNESDAY, AUousr 29, 1990 Christine Shunk, Coatesville, PA; and Nicole Snow, New Canaan, CT ................ 5 Panel consisting of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORY 319—THE VIETNAM WARS Fall 2017 Mr
    University of Wisconsin–Madison Department of History HISTORY 319—THE VIETNAM WARS Fall 2017 Mr. McCoy I. COURSE PROCEDURES: Class Meetings: Lectures are given in 1111 Humanities by Mr. McCoy on Tuesdays and Thursdays, from 4:00 to 5:15 p.m. In addition, students will attend a one-hour discussion section each week conducted by the Teaching Assistant (TA) for this course. N.B. Laptops may used only for taking notes and may not be used to access the Internet. Office Hours: —For Marlana Margaria, Humanities Room 4274, on Tuesdays from 1:45 to 3:45 p.m. and other hours by appointment (TEL: 265-9480). Messages may be left in Humanities Mailbox No. 4041, or sent via e-mail to: <[email protected]> —For Alfred McCoy, Humanities Room 5131, Thursdays 12:00 to 2:00 p.m. and other hours by appointment (TEL: 263-1855). Messages may be left in Humanities Mailbox No. 5026, or sent via e-mail to: <[email protected]> Grading: Students shall complete three pieces of written work. On October 19, students shall take a midterm examination. On November 21, students shall submit a 5,000-word research essay with full footnotes and bibliographic references. During examination week on December 16, students shall take a two-hour final examination. Final grades shall be computed as follows: —midterm take-home exam: 20% —research essay: 30% —discussion section mark: 30% —final examination: 20% —extra credit/film viewing: 3% Course Requirements: For each of these assignments, there are different requirements for both the amount and form of work to be done: a.) Midterm take-home examination: Select two questions from a list distributed in the lecture on Thursday, October 19, and turn in two short essays totaling five typed pages, with full endnote citations, at the start of class on Tuesday, October 24.
    [Show full text]
  • Gone Rogue: Time to Reform the Presidential Primary Debates
    Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy Discussion Paper Series #D-67, January 2012 Gone Rogue: Time to Reform the Presidential Primary Debates by Mark McKinnon Shorenstein Center Reidy Fellow, Fall 2011 Political Communications Strategist Vice Chairman Hill+Knowlton Strategies Research Assistant: Sacha Feinman © 2012 President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights reserved. How would the course of history been altered had P.T. Barnum moderated the famed Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858? Today’s ultimate showman and on-again, off-again presidential candidate Donald Trump invited the Republican presidential primary contenders to a debate he planned to moderate and broadcast over the Christmas holidays. One of a record 30 such debates and forums held or scheduled between May 2011 and March 2012, this, more than any of the previous debates, had the potential to be an embarrassing debacle. Trump “could do a lot of damage to somebody,” said Karl Rove, the architect of President George W. Bush’s 2000 and 2004 campaigns, in an interview with Greta Van Susteren of Fox News. “And I suspect it’s not going to be to the candidate that he’s leaning towards. This is a man who says himself that he is going to run— potentially run—for the president of the United States starting next May. Why do we have that person moderating a debate?” 1 Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the 2008 Republican nominee for president, also reacted: “I guarantee you, there are too many debates and we have lost the focus on what the candidates’ vision for America is..
    [Show full text]