A History of Replacing a Losing Candidate

Jon Grunseth (R-MN)

In 1990, Jon Grunseth was the Republican nominee for Minnesota's gubernatorial race, and just six weeks out from the election, he held a slim lead in the race against incumbent Democratic Governor Rudy Perpich.  Perpich was deeply unpopular, which was true for a lot of governors in 1990 (the economy was in the tank), but had what seemed like a godsend to his campaign just three weeks out from the election (one of the quintessential October surprises).  Grunseth was accused of sexual impropriety with two teenagers in the early 1980's.  It was a huge scandal, and almost certainly would've reelected Perpich were it not for the Republicans pulling off the impossible.  After an additional extramarital affair (with an adult woman) came to light closer to the election, Grunseth withdrew from the race, and was replaced on the ballot by State Auditor Arne Carlson, who had come in second to him in the primary.  Carlson would go on, with just eight days of campaigning, to beat Perpich and serve eight years as Minnesota's (very popular) governor.

Twelve years later, Democrats were facing a dilemma.  Having just won the Senate majority with the party switch of Jim Jeffords, they were struggling to hold onto their majority, and one of the big reasons was because of New Jersey.  Senator Bob Torricelli was initially favored to win in the blue state but an admonishment from the Senate Ethics Committee had taken a toll on his approval, and by September, it was clear that he was going to lose a winnable seat to Republican Doug Forrester.  The only way for Democrats to win was to replace Torricelli, and on September 30th, Torricelli dropped out of the race, being replaced by his longtime political rival (but fellow Democrat) Frank Lautenberg, staging a comeback as Lautenberg had retired from the Senate just two years earlier.  Forrester sued, saying it wasn't fair that Lautenberg could get in after so many filing deadlines had passed, but the liberal New Jersey Supreme Court said that Lautenberg could stand for reelection, and while the Democrats didn't end up winning the majority that November, Lautenberg won reelection, and would stay in the Senate for the rest of his life.

Generally when a political candidate is replaced late in the contest, it's because the political candidate has died.  In the same year as Lautenberg, Sen. Paul Wellstone passed away in a plane crash and was replaced on the ballot by former Vice President Walter Mondale.  But in the cases of Grunseth & Torricelli, they were able to stand for reelection-this wasn't a case where they had died or even been jailed, and them running for reelection was impossible.  The reason they dropped out was because they weren't going to win, and their party had a candidate on deck who could win.

Let's be clear-when we're talking about the current situation involving President Biden, this is what we're really talking about.  People will pontificate about whether he's fit for the presidency, whether he's too old, but ultimately...this is about whether or not he can win.  If Biden was leading in every swing state poll headed into the debate, the Democrats wouldn't be having this panic attack (okay, they would, but it wouldn't be this pronounced-Democrats have no chill as a rule).  Very few people think that Biden is incapable of leading the country through January.  Even me, who is at this point on record with saying I think he should step aside, has no concerns about him completing his term.  I do think that, given what we have seen in the past few days, expecting him to run the country for four years is a question mark, but I'll be real-that's why we have vice presidents.  If Biden was able to win, I'd have no problem reelecting him even knowing that there's a decent chance Kamala Harris finishes his next term.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)

Politics ain't beanbag, and while I don't believe in breaking laws to win, I do think if you have to choose between losing honorably and winning sneakily...you take the latter.  Grunseth & Torricelli should've been forced to stay on-the people had chosen them, they'd chosen poorly, their opponents had run better campaigns, and they deserved to get their victories.  It was the fair thing to do.  But why lose when you can win?  In life, you have to win the game in front of you, and if we have a chance to put a new game in front of the Republicans given we're losing the current one, I think it's okay to say we'll take it.  No Democrat is ever going to say this out loud because it's horrible politics, particularly on a national scale where something like a Grunseth/Torricelli has never been attempted, but that's the reason the Democrats are running scared right now.  They think Biden's going to lose a race they should be able to win, and if they've got some room to still do it, they want a second chance.  

What's happening to Biden right now is rough & it makes me feel genuinely sad not just for the country but for him specifically-Biden's been my hero since I was 14, my absolute favorite politician, and seeing the most honorable man in American politics get crucified by his fellow Democrats in hopes of taking him out of the race is darn near unbearable (this is very much an "I can't believe we did that" moment in Democratic politics we're all going to have to do some soul-searching on later).  But it's hard not to look at what Carlson & Lautenberg did, getting those checkmarks, and not think that ultimately it was worth it.  If Biden is forced out and Harris wins in November...we'll look at this as a necessary evil of this race, where we didn't win fair but we still won.