Either Clinton 2.0:
Or perhaps even Clinton 3.0:
All while AntiFA continues its nonsense:
Dare I say the Last Democrat who actually cared for America.
After 1968 the Dem's went full on Total Anti-American Communist.
Yes during the FDR administration they were up the gills in the government too and tried to sell us out the Soviets at every turn.
After '68 and Vietnam. I don't know. I don't what changed. I admit, I was born 20 years later so I have no concept of what life and politics was like back then.
Still, Hubert Humphrey once tried to outlaw the Communist Party U.S.A.
Can you imagine the Dems doing that today?
Communist New Democrats fought for control of the Party and the Media in 1968, won, and have colluded on elections ever since.
They also hold the power in academia and big business these days. Corporate liberalism (and globalism) is king.
Is it possible to write the words “civil rights” without them being followed by the word “icon?”
Not sure what this has to do with 1972 as most of it is based on a shaky comparison with 1968, but a good history summary nonetheless.
The events of 1968 were not analogous to 2016. Donald Trump was a particularly strong candidate in blue-collar working class states with an independent appeal that resonated and still resonates with voters that are fed up with establishment uniparty politics.
There was no Wallace in the 2016 race. Sanders had no such appeal. The Wallace phenomenon was a reaction to a heavy-handed Kennedy-Johnson Civil Rights crackdown on states that saw massively unpopular forced busing. No such animus existed in 2016.
What existed in 1968 that is analogous to 2016 is a failure to inspire and lead. LBJ and Obama are alike in that both were failures in leadership. They are different in that Obama had achieved some sort of bizarre cult status which in my opinion is paper thin. But Obama was followed by Hillary Clinton whose platform was never well-defined other than it was her turn and she had a vagina. Her alternative was a geriatric fellow that had a few sound bites but very little energy and speed. The entire slate of democrats for high office was a dismal spectacle.
My view is that democrats may regroup and regain lost ground but it won’t be by 2020. It will be well beyond 2020.
[Infighting Democrats could have defeated the unpopular Nixon if not for a few unforeseen developments.]
Nixon was unpopular in ‘68?
He was the Law and Order candidate.
Humphrey was the candidate (VP) representing the disastrous Johnson administration.
American Independent Wallace got 9.9 million or 13.5%.
Nixon 301 ELECTORAL votes from 32 states.
Humphrey 191 ELECTORAL votes from 13 states + DC.
Wallace 46 ELECTORAL votes from 5 states.
Even if the 46 electoral votes for Wallace were swung to Humphrey, he would only have 237, and Nixon would still have 301.
At that time, the South was still Democrat, even though Wallace took Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia.
Sadly, no. Because the electorate has moved far, far to the left in 45 years.
Were he alive today George McGovern would be regarded as a Democrat Centrist, and could probably win.
Nixon won overwhelming in the only vote that counts, the Electoral vote.
Richard Nixon Republican Spiro Agnew 301 electoral votes.
Most of their potential nominees are potential McGoverns.
“Democrats would remain out of the White House until 1980, when Jimmy Carter ran a winning Humphrey-like campaign as a centrist populist outsider from the South.”
E
1976.
I hope not, it was a “lonely landslide” accompanied by paltry House gains (and something like half of Nixon seats electing rats) and a LOSS of Senate seats.
I was in third grade in 1968. Every adult that I knew of voted for George Wallace.