I don't understand why the accepted wisdom is that 2008 is first election with no incumb. prez or v.p. The press keeps saying it, but neither Eisenhower nor Stevenson were incumbents in 1952. Am I missing something? Can anyone shed light on this for me?
2007-01-27 11:13:43 · 4 answers · asked by Little White Brother 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Little White brother, here is your answer. While reporters are sometimes foolish, they are right on this one, mostly. Truman gave up his bid after losing the New Hampshire primary and Alben W. Barkley, Harry Truman's VP, entered the race for the democratic nomination. He just didn't win, in part due to Truman's support of Adlai Stevenson. So incumbents did not run for president in 1952, even though they did seek the opportunity to, neither Bush (who can't) or Cheney are even seeking the nomination.
2007-01-27 12:06:30 · answer #1 · answered by larry.fowler40 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I thought about that seeing the article in Time today. At this time in 1951, Harry Truman was still theoretically running for re-election in 1952. However, the firing of Douglas MacArthur and the problems with the Korean War, as well as MrCarthyism, led Truman early in 1952 to drop out of the race.
2007-01-27 11:35:15 · answer #2 · answered by Patrick M 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1952 is correct.
2007-01-27 11:27:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Reporters are stupid.
2007-01-27 11:17:58 · answer #4 · answered by Larry R 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋