Scott Walker’s Campaign Was The Shortest In At Least 20 Years

Philip Bump notes that Scott Walker’s Presidential Campaign was the shortest major party campaign in two decades:

The complete and utter collapse of Scott Walker’s presidential bid appears to bring to an end the shortest presidential campaign since at least 2000.

Walker’s bid began with his announcement July 13 before a fancy backdrop and in front of an energetic crowd in Waukesha, Wis. It ended in Madison on Monday, in front of a drab background and with only a few reporters listening in. From start to end, the campaign lasted 70 days — a shorter campaign than even Rick Perry’s, since Perry started earlier.

Looking back at major candidate campaigns since 2000, 70 days appears to be the shortest, by at least a week. Jim Gilmore’s 2008 bid lasted 79 days. Tim Pawlenty hung on for 83 days in 2012.

Walker, of course, was leading in the polls in Iowa, and doing strongly elsewhere for several months before he entered the race. He didn’t officially enter the race until July 13th largely, he said, because of the need to deal with the budget in Wisconsin. Once he did get in the race, though, his numbers began sinking like a stone. While Donald Trump’s rise in the polls is obviously part of what happened to Walker, it seems fairly clear that once voters began to get to know Walker they started turning away from him.

FILED UNDER: Campaign 2016, Quick Takes, US Politics,
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010 and contributed a staggering 16,483 posts before his retirement in January 2020.

Comments

  1. NW-Steve says:

    We hardly knew you Scott.

    Seems like a good way to keep it.

  2. Tillman says:

    Huh. Pawlenty lasted longer. I guess Walker just took his place as the epitome of a short-lived and unexciting candidacy.

  3. DrDaveT says:

    once voters began to get to know Walker they started turning away from him

    That’s Scott Walker? I must have been thinking of Ridley Walker… Or was it Jimmy Walker? Or maybe Scott Weiland…”

  4. James Pearce says:

    @DrDaveT: Ridley Walker?! Clutch fan or Russell Hoban fan? Both?

  5. al-Ameda says:

    @James Pearce:

    @DrDaveT: Ridley Walker?! Clutch fan or Russell Hoban fan? Both?

    @DrDaveT:

    “That’s Scott Walker? I must have been thinking of Ridley Walker… Or was it Jimmy Walker? Or maybe Scott Weiland…”

    Jeez, I’m way off, I thought it was Walker, Texas Ranger?
    Come to think of it, Chuck Norris would probably poll at 55% if he announced his candidacy today.

  6. OzarkHillbilly says:

    Doug? I think you need a remedial math course. 😉

  7. DrDaveT says:

    @James Pearce:

    Ridley Walker?!

    I haven’t actually read it, but I’ve been an SF fan forever and have heard a lot about it. (Which didn’t prevent me from misspelling Riddley, alas…)

  8. anjin-san says:

    There is a certain symmetry here, as Walker may be the biggest asshole to run in 20 years…