Posted on 10/21/2009 4:58:28 PM PDT by changeitback440
im curious how carter's '76 victory and obama's '08 victory are similar
You know there is this site called google....
Why don’t you do your own research newbie
Electoral Vote 297 240
States carried 23 + DC 27
Popular vote 40,831,881 39,148,634
Percentage 50.1% 48.0%
Carter barely won.
Imagine we had California and NJ and still lost. The country was way less screwed up then, the radicalization of California has been a real loss.
I did a double take when I saw Texas went for Carter.
Welcome to FR, n00b..
Jimmuh Cartuh and Barry Dunham-Soetoro...
Ah, yes, a lot in common...
:)
totally different.
carter took every state in the south, plus winning texas.
ford carried the center-west. california, oregon, washington, etc.
basically reverse the map from 2008 and you have 1976.
Ignore the PEANUT gallery...
Your question is a valid one and needed an answer!
Carter fooled most of the politically naive into thinking he was a conservative Southern Democrat.
After four years of radical leftist governing, he was not fooling very many. That is why Reagan beat him in a landslide.
The fact that the economy was in bad shape didn’t help him either.
It’s tempting to imagine Carter losing in 1976. He was so bad for America and the world.
But I wonder.
If Ford had won, who would have been President of the United States in 1981?
“...The country was way less screwed up then, the radicalization of California has been a real loss.”
Very good point. Long before I was politically active, CA was quite conservative outside of SF, no? If you know.
teddy kennedy
A lot in common? Well, there was inflation and malaise...I seem to recall something about Iran...I think even a guy named Ahmadinejad was involved, too... I think something was going on in Afghanistan as well...different super power though...Wasn’t swine flu around as well? Can gas lines be far behind?
no freaking way
it wasnt conservative, it was rich.
the gop was the party of country clubs. the democrats were the party of the working class.
That tends to happen when your state is overrun by foreigners.
It is amazing how radically different the electoral map has changed in 30 some years.
IF Obama runs for TOTUS in 2012, I predict he will carry D.C. Remember, you heard it here first.
the gop was the party of country clubs. the democrats were the party of the working class.
Orange and San Diego counties went for Goldwater in 1964 -- Orange by a healthy margin, San Diego by a hair's breath.
That's about as conservative as any part of the country got, outside of the segregationist states.
Twenty years later, Reagan won all but four counties in the San Francisco area.
IMHO, look to LBJ for a parallel in legislative strategy. The good thing is, LBJ overreached and the country was so sick of him, he didn't even take a chance running for re-election. Unfortunately, he also had some major crap passed.
I think Iwannajihad was one of the kiddnappers involved in the 444 days of the American Embassy kidnapping of the American citizens...
The Ahatola Komeini brought back Sharia Law to Iran..
This time they want to spread it to Britian and the US...
I’m curious about why you can’t find your “Shift” key.
Agreed very much!
didnt mean to annoy you.......do you reply to every topic? get a life
Obama fooled most of the politically naive into thinking he was a genial TV news anchor. Maybe some of them are starting to figure it out.
That's true.
There was also a lot of overhang from the Nixon era pardon.
Ford was a decent fellow but the MSM worked hard to portray him as an idiot. He probably made the all time debate gaffe declaring Eastern Europe to not be under Soviet domination.
Carter was the bonafide idiot however as history shows.
bookmark
You did not annoy me. No I don’t reply to every post just silly ones. Oh and my life turned out better than my wildest dreams.
Welcome to Free Republic
“carter took every state in the south, plus winning texas.”
In 1976 Carter did take the South, except for that southern State, Virginia...
dvwjr
Carter’s accent fooled a lot of people.
Yes, there would’ve been a very good chance of that happening. Ford would not have been successful in turning around the country during that period (especially as a RINO) from ‘77 to ‘81, and with the radical moonbat-led post-Watergate Congresses, ‘78 would’ve likely doubled the losses we incurred in ‘74, and quite possibly could’ve pushed the GOP down to numbers unseen since the Depression (in an anti-Ford/GOP climate, our Senate numbers were 39 going into the ‘78 election, and we could’ve lost 11 seats, among them being potentially Ted Stevens (AK), Jim McClure (ID), Chuck Percy (IL), the open KS seat (which went to Nancy Kassebaum), Pete Domenici (NM), Jesse Helms (NC), Mark Hatfield (OR), Strom Thurmond (SC), Howard Baker (TN), John Tower (TX) & the VA open seat (which went to John Warner) - some of whom won in ‘78 with underwhelming margins, and 8 seats we did win by beating incumbent Dems or capturing their open seats would’ve likely been lost (Bill Armstrong (CO); Roger Jepsen (IA); Bill Cohen (ME); Rudy Boschwitz & Dave Durenberger (MN); Thad Cochran (MS); Gordon Humphreys (NH); Larry Pressler (SD)). So add that up and we could’ve had 28 GOP Senators (including RINOs) in 1978 and perhaps as few as 100-120 (out of 435) Republicans in the House (we only had 143 in ‘77-’78). The party would’ve been powerless as a functioning opposition.
The ‘80 Dem ticket probably would’ve been Ted Kennedy-George Wallace (kid you not) and the GOP ticket probably Vice-President Bob Dole and George HW Bush (Reagan might not have even run). Kennedy-Wallace would’ve won, and Reagan would never have become President. Of course, then the 1984 ticket of ex-Ford Defense Sec Dick Cheney and DE Gov Pete du Pont would’ve likely won over Ted. (Cheney edging out in the GOP Presidential primary now-freshman TX Gov. George HW Bush, the upset ‘82 winner over Dem Gov. John Hill, the first GOP Governor since Reconstruction). There’s some alternate history for you. ;-)
1984 was a year with very low Dem turnout (and turnout in general). Reagan actually won every county in New Jersey (including Hudson, Mercer, Middlesex, Passaic, and Camden), with the exception of Essex, which Mondale barely won. That had more to do with the lack of Dem turnout than anything else.
The democraps are the party of screwing and lying to the working class.
‘76 was interesting, Ford did well in the north and west (won IL) Jimmy Farter won the entire south save for VA. Even in 1980 the south very close. That peanut brain appealed to them I guess.
Kennedy defiantly would have been the rat nominee in ‘80 if Ford had won.
The RINO Ford and heavily rat congress would have been terrible. I can’t imagine the GOP would have been able to win in 1980.
Even if Reagan had won the nod in ‘76 and the general he would have been hampered by congress and possibly been a one termer.
“Ted Kennedy-George Wallace”
I think you’ve told me this before idea. Post-racist cripple Wallace. But I don’t know. Why would Ted pick a veep with such baggage? To distract from his own? ;p
How about Kennedy-Moonbeam Brown? Too radical maybe.
Perhaps Reubin Askew, John Glenn, Mo Udall, or Lloyd Bentsen. Or even Mondale for try number 2.
For the record, turnout in 1984 was higher than it was in 1980 or 1988, or 1996 or 2000. It may have been a little lower than average, but not much.
As I think I said earlier, a win's a win. If the other party's voters don't show up it's still a victory.
nice to meet you, changeitback440... i pretty much stay away from the shift key too... have been doing so for years... in fact, my signature is also in lower case...
Re: your tagline
So you're a tequila snob, huh? Good for you!
I'm a grammar and punctuation snob. Unless one is the reincarnation of e.e. cummings, I think the use of all lower case makes people look kind of lazy at the very least.
Just my $0.02!
then we have that in common! i am a grammarian (which includes punctuation) stickler myself... i am a professional editor and proofreader... i also teach grammar and writing... haha! when it comes to formal writing, i do follow the rules... unless i intentionally break them... i never let my students get away with breaking the rules... "one cannot intentionally break the rules unless one has mastered the rules." that's my motto...
mis dos centavos :-)
p.s.--so is your grammarian and punctuation snobbery a self-proclamation? please understand that i do not give credence to it or to your authority to give only e.e. cummings and any of her reincarnates a pass... my first name and maiden name both begin with D... capital D's are so ugly, in my opinion... i found the lower case D to be so much more attractive... that is why i decided to go with the lower case D's in my signature... that i actually thought about it and made a decision hardly constitutes laziness...
as i've aged i've come to do away with basing my decisions on how i look to others... this was no easy feat... i come from a family where appearance means more than the truth... i now know who i am and am comfortable with who i am (most of the time)... so if i come across as "kind of lazy at the very least," to you--Constitution Day--satis bene...
You’re forgetting about a gal named Mary Jo.
Mary Jo
Mary Jo
Mary Jo
google cant provide me with the opinions and insight i get on freerepublic ;)
I dont feel either carter or obama are worthy of my “shift” key ;)
Against Dole, who was bitterly humorless while campaigning (yet in person, while not campaigning, the total opposite), Ted Kennedy would've appeared the more personable and appealling candidate. With little exception, it's usually the more personable candidate that wins the Presidential race.
"Even if Reagan had won the nod in ‘76 and the general he would have been hampered by congress and possibly been a one termer."
Exactly. The Congress in '77-'79 was quite radical and heavily Dem. He'd have had to battle a hostile Congress from day #1 (worse yet, there was a huge RINO contingent, and they'd have opposed him, too). Reagan benefitted in '80 by having a GOP Senate and enough of a GOP/Boll Weevil Dem coalition to get his agenda through. Reagan would've had to have spent his time on defense during '77-'81, hoping to whittle down the numbers of Dems for the '78 midterms and the like, but it would've been an uphill battle. At best he could try to make deals with more centrist Dems (ones that had been pulled left by the Watergate babies), but putting together the numbers would've been tough. If he got some modest accomplishments, he might've been able to win again in '80, but it's doubtful he'd have ever gotten the GOP majority, and '82 would've been a really bad 6-year wipeout (well beyond what it ended up being). Worse, yet, Vice-President Dick Schweiker (despite his having moved rightward), would not have likely been able to succeed Reagan in '84. The Dems might've won it that year, though probably not with Kennedy, perhaps then Jerry Brown (who would've been Senator at that point, defeating San Diego Mayor Pete Wilson two years earlier) or Senator Jimmy Carter (who would've beaten Herman Talmadge in the '80 Dem primary).
"I think you’ve told me this before idea. Post-racist cripple Wallace. But I don’t know. Why would Ted pick a veep with such baggage? To distract from his own? ;p"
Partly to distract, but Wallace had been largely redeemed by that point (as far as Dems were concerned). He'd have been 2 years off his 3rd term, one of the preeminent Southern political figures. Wallace could deliver Ted a decent enough chunk of the South. Essentially a bit of a replay of 1960 with JFK & LBJ. You better believe the Dems would've ate that up. As for Mary Jo ? Well, the sky-high unemployment, inflation, stagnation and "corruption" of 12 years of GOP Presidents (albeit with hyper-Dem Congresses) would've made Ted's "unfortunate accident" pale in comparison. Ted would've dismissed as "old news" from 11 years earlier, and the media would've aided the cause. They would've fanned the public to want to resurrect Camelot. It would've been just like last year. Bob Dole, at 57, would've been the "mean old man" (nevermind an injured war hero) against the youngish (48, a year older than Zero) Ted. I could see the whole campaign in my head. Dole would've carried the midwest, probably TX (with Bush) and VA, but I think Ted & George Wallace would've cleaned up the N.E., the coastal states, a good chunk of the Deep South. I think the map would've looked a bit like this... (the '80 EV votes shown here)
"How about Kennedy-Moonbeam Brown? Too radical maybe."
An interesting East Coast/West Coast combo, but more than likely Kennedy needed a Southerner on the ticket, otherwise risk losing it going to the GOP. CA wouldn't have gone for Dole, even in '80, especially in a bad recession blamed on Ford, so Ted would've carried the state without having to pick Gov. Brown.
"Perhaps Reubin Askew, John Glenn, Mo Udall, or Lloyd Bentsen. Or even Mondale for try number 2."
All intriguing choices, especially Askew, but I think FL still would've stayed in the Dem column given a recession, perhaps with Wallace helping. Glenn wouldn't have been needed to carry a suffering Rust Belt. Udall wouldn't have been able to help Kennedy carry hyper-GOP AZ. Bentsen might've helped in TX a bit, but I think the state was moving towards the GOP, anyway, and would've gone that way in '80, recession or no, if Bush were on the ticket. I think the only reason why some Southern states that went for Carter in '76 would've swung to Dole in '80 is solely because even with Wallace, Ted Kennedy would've been too much to stomach, recession or no. My state of TN didn't vote for JFK with LBJ even in 1960. Putting together Ted & Geo. Wallace would've been like uniting the factions in a way any of the other candidates wouldn't have worked. Although Wallace was NOT a Conservative, despite claims to the contrary, he was a Populist of sorts who could hold onto Southern Conservatives by his rhetorical saber-rattling (Carter succeeded solely because he had Wallace to pave the way, he co-opted his schtick without the harder edges, and wrapped it in a faux-religious piety).
“With little exception, it’s usually the more personable candidate that wins the Presidential race.”
Who is the exception?
Barry had it over McLame.
Bush over 2 pieces of wood.
Bubba over Dole and Poppy.
” Although Wallace was NOT a Conservative, despite claims to the contrary”
Damn right.
Wallace is popular in fiction.
I once heard Chrissy Matthewsclaim that Wallace cost HHH the election.
Nixon would have got, what 65-70% of the Wallace votes?
Ford likely edged Carter in personability, but he looked stiff in the debates, and that awful gaffe about Poland not being under Soviet control (WTF ?!?). McGovern was probably more personable than Nixon, too (which may have had them worried, but McGovern was a friendly-seeming moonbat). Humphrey was probably more personable than Nixon, too (I remember Jesse Helms absolutely reduced to tears speaking of Humphrey’s last appearance on the Senate floor when he was terminally ill - and I only saw two people get that upset over Nixon’s death publicly, one was his kid brother at the funeral, and the other was Bob Dole). Goldwater and LBJ may have been a tie, but both were quite arrogant, but Goldie took a real screwing in ‘64, I’d have been real pissed and ugly myself.
Looking at ‘72, you could conclude that Nixon would’ve received the bulk of Wallace’s votes had he not run in ‘68, but the problem with that is you forget the diehard Dems in those states, and even with Humphrey, Nixon and him might’ve merely split the vote at that point. It took an extra effort and focus on getting the Wallace voters over to the GOP for ‘72, and remember a huge number of them went right back to Carter in ‘76 again. So, yes, Humphrey might very well have pulled off a narrow win, but I think he would’ve had a bad time of it, especially if he decided to move hard-left and exit/abandon Vietnam rapidly.
In fact, take it one step further, and I’ll say if Humphrey-Muskie had run again in ‘72, you can probably guess who I believe the GOP nominee would’ve been. Yup, CA Gov. Ronald Reagan, and he’d have won, too, and probably swept in GOP majorities in BOTH the Senate and House (8 years ahead of time for the former, 22 years ahead of time for the latter). His potential running mate ? TX Senator George HW Bush, who would’ve beaten Lloyd Bentsen in 1970 in a viscerally anti-Dem/anti-HHH year. Looks like any way you cut it, those guys were going to end up as President.
But, boy, the ‘70s sure would’ve turned out differently. Reagan would’ve won Vietnam, too, and the Soviet Union would’ve collapsed a decade earlier. Best part of all ? No Jimmy Carter in the WH (might’ve even lost to Hal Suit for Governor in ‘70), and the South would’ve realigned 20-30 years ahead of schedule.
The scenario would be perfect if you can find a better VP for Reagan, not that freshman RINO sqiush from Texas. ;D
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.