Replies

Lincoln lost elections for state House in 1832, and for US Senate in 1854 and 1858, state leg elected Senators back then, in ‘54 Whigs and antislavery democrats had the majority but the democrats resfused to elect a Whig to the Senate so Lincoln withdrew in favor of an anti-slavery democrat. In ‘58 democrats kept the majority in Illinois, though GOP candidates actually won the popular vote, indicating Lincoln likely would have won a popular election. He also lost a bid for the Whig nomination to Congress in 1843 (for the ‘44 election) I don’t know if there would have been a “primary” or how the nominees were selected but Lincoln withdrew and the Whig rivals agreed to take turns running for the seat. He also lost a bid for the GOP VP nomination in 1856.

He won elections for State House in 1834, 36, 38 and 40. And was elected to one term in the US House in 1846, elected to state House again in 1854 but declined to take his seat, and then elected twice as President (the first time being a contested nomination that he won).

So call it 9 wins to 5 losses.

As for Beto, obviously he lost making him a weaker candidate than if he had won. But ironically winning would have hampered him running for President since it would unseemly to start running after having been a Senator for only 5 minutes, and if he were elected he’d have to resign and give the seat back to the GOP.

Democrap fascination with this empty bag of air speaks to the dissatisfaction with the more conventional choices and rat affinity for artificially created “star” candidates. I doubt he will be a major candidate. But if Harris or Liawhatha (or Hillary!) or any woman or Black man is the rat nominee then he might be considered for the Vice Presidential nomination. If a White man like Biden or Sanders is the nominee, then no. Kerry/Edwards will go down as the last rat ticket comprised of 2 White men.