Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-10975360-20131014124545/@comment-32656-20131121104025

An unqualified politician would do worse. Quayle's problem was more a lack of common sense than anything. Would not have the "idiot" perception had he kept his trap shut more often.

The third party in 1980 drained votes from Reagan, primarily. He would have had a larger win had that guy not ran.

That Reagan won in 1984, and an even bigger lead at that, more or less kills the argument that the electorate was not "into" his concepts.

Reagan actually polled better in 1976 than Ford nationally. He just didn't win the primaries. Ford came pretty close to winning, despite the easy attacks Carter had. Reagan, none of that works.

He did not, in fact, run a conservative campaign. He ran the same type of campaign that he ran to get elected in California.

The concept that the Democratic Congress is the "only thing that stopped him from doing so" is unfounded. No basis to it, really.

As I said, aside from the last couple of weeks - when Christie's "bump" from re-election is boosting him - he has been polling worse.

Christie would not be running such ads - he has to win the nomination first. Those ads only work if you have an incumbent advantage, so to speak. That is why Obama, Bush, and Clinton, among others, were all able to do them, and paint the national image of their opponent before that opponent was able to respond.

If Hilary does not run, Biden would easily get the nomination. He'd then be able to set the "scene" of his opponent. Even if Biden has to fight for the nomination in that context, Christie or any other Republican would not have the time to do this, needing to win their own nomination.

Republicans aren't better at it, imo. The two are about the same. Heck, in the last couple decades the Dems have been more successful with it at the presidential level.