Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

If you could change one presidential election since 1968

Posted on 06/15/2017 11:14:23 AM PDT by MNDude

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last
To: nickcarraway

There would not have been an LBJ.


21 posted on 06/15/2017 11:26:29 AM PDT by Cowboy Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

It’s amusing to think that doing so would made any substantial difference. Same puppeteers, same script, different puppets.


22 posted on 06/15/2017 11:26:53 AM PDT by thoughtomator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP

I was thinking along the same lines but even before 64. I’d like to have seen Nixon win in 1960, hopefully keeping us out of Vietnam, and then the radicalization we saw in the 60’s and early 70’s might not have been so great.

This is what has really destroyed this country, the radical break from traditional values and work ethics largely attributable to the 1960’s. I honestly don’t know if we’ll ever recover.

Without the Vietnam war to rally around though the radicalization may not have gained as much traction as it did. Who knows though. We’re stuck in this reality I guess.


23 posted on 06/15/2017 11:30:02 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

1992


24 posted on 06/15/2017 11:32:58 AM PDT by a real Sheila (Love my golden retrievers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democrats hate too much

Yeah I would think no Carter would have the best results.


25 posted on 06/15/2017 11:35:40 AM PDT by enduserindy (I always smile when my competition doubles down on stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard

I actually have an old political cartoon produced during the primaries that year. It shows Bill as one of the democrats, each floating down a river on a tire tube to certain doom over a waterfall. bill is in the front and on his tube are the words “Genifer Flowers”.

Also, no “real” candidates joined that race for the dems because Bush’s numbers were absurdly high. When they dropped like a rock, it was too late to enter. The “viable” candidate at the top of the pack won the lottery.


26 posted on 06/15/2017 11:36:04 AM PDT by Mr. Douglas (Best. Election. EVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

I’d have Perot win. Just to see what would happen.


27 posted on 06/15/2017 11:38:21 AM PDT by Seruzawa (FABOL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven

“Without the Vietnam war to rally around though the radicalization may not have gained as much traction as it did. Who knows though.”

I think it would have happened anyway,just as it did in the 1920s-——and as it is changing now.

.


28 posted on 06/15/2017 11:40:45 AM PDT by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Ford should have waited until he beat Carter to pardon Nixon. I have always thought that many people didn’t vote for Ford because of the pardon. We wouldn’t have the Iran problem. Maybe


29 posted on 06/15/2017 11:44:09 AM PDT by PeteyBoy (The wall. Build it and they won't come.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP
1964

We have a winner.

30 posted on 06/15/2017 11:44:30 AM PDT by jtal (St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle ....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Easy, 1860. No Lincoln. No War of Yankee Aggression. Slavery becomes economically unfeasible. Blacks choose between African return or resettlement in New Mexico Territory.


31 posted on 06/15/2017 11:44:37 AM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democrats hate too much

1992 was my first thought, but had Reagan secured and won the election four years earlier, we might’ve had no Iran debacle, and the economic misery of the Carter years would’ve likely been forestalled. Not to mention that the evil Empire may have been defeated earlier, with the help of John Paul II and lady Thatcher coming on the stage at that time.

Interesting mind game, but who knows… some liberal film director would probably make it into an alternate universe flick with 1984 coming about that year per Orwell, knowing how Reagan was treated.


32 posted on 06/15/2017 11:49:31 AM PDT by mikrofon (Honor the Flag Day -Every day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

Obama


33 posted on 06/15/2017 11:50:49 AM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democrats hate too much
Exactly. The Shah of Iran would have been supported by the US and replaced by his son. No Ayatollah revolution, so no Soviet invasion of Afghanistan to counter Islamism.

No mujahedeen, therefore no rise of Al Qaida. The Islamic threat would have been contained by middle eastern dictators ("They might be sons of bitches, but they're OUR sons of bitches").

34 posted on 06/15/2017 11:52:29 AM PDT by rfp1234 (DinosorosExtinction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Douglas

The only reason that Clinton even got the Democrat nomination in 1992 is because Bush Sr.’s approval ratings were sky high immediately after the first Gulf War, when Democrats were all deciding whether or not to run. All of the then “A list” Democrats decided not to run believing that Bush was unbeatable, leaving Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, Paul “The Last Democrat Candidate from Massachusetts Did So Well, Why Not Nominate Another” Tsongas, and Bill “I Can’t Be Any Worse Than Those Other Losers” Clinton.

If Bush Sr. had won in 1992, then a Democrat would probably have won in 1996. I have no idea who that would have been (maybe Algore), just that it probably would not have been Clinton.

So if Bush had won a second term in 1992, I think we would have ended up with the unknown Democrat in 1996 and 2000, Bush Jr. in 2004 and 2008, and Obama or Hillary in 2012 and 2016.


35 posted on 06/15/2017 11:52:48 AM PDT by Bubba_Leroy (The Obamanation has ended!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob

I would have voted for Barry Goldwater in 1964, but voting age was 21 and I wouldn’t qualify until the next National election.


36 posted on 06/15/2017 11:53:37 AM PDT by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012

1988 Robert Dole. Still a moderate but a lot of stature.


37 posted on 06/15/2017 11:53:41 AM PDT by DIRTYSECRET (urope. Why do they put up with this.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

In 2016 we did! Wishes no more!


38 posted on 06/15/2017 11:56:40 AM PDT by Harpotoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP

Definitely Goldwater, 1964.


39 posted on 06/15/2017 11:57:58 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Democrats hate too much

Ford was the nominee in 76.

I have mixed feelings. If Ford beats Carter, we probably wouldn’t have gotten Reagan in 1980.


40 posted on 06/15/2017 11:59:11 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson