Letters to the Editor

• ruffissama ... take the sh#t out of yours

  [Read the article: Looking past Pennsylvania]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  "My observation is based on a demographic I am quite familiar with. Every generation has their McGovern."

  I would be very interested to hear your detailed demographic analysis.

  Here's mine:

  In 1972, McGovern won only one state - Massachusetts - and the District of Columbia.

  In 1984, Walter Mondale won only one state - Minnesota - and the District of Columbia.

  Was Mondale a McGovern?

  No, in that election, the McGovern role was played by Gary Hart.

  Mondale was the Hubert Humphrey character.

  So you got the same result with a Humphrey as you got with a McGovern.

  In 1988, Michael Dukakkis won ten states - all of which, except West Virginia and Iowa, have been won by every subsequent Democratic presidential candidate (for the record, they are Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii). I leave it to you to decide whether Dukakkis was a Humphrey or a McGovern. I do remember that he was an uncharismatic technocrat who was constantly touting his competence (sound like anyone you know)? Incidentally, this was the first presidential election I was able to vote in, but I didn't bother because neither Bush nor Dukakkis seemed worth going to the polls for (and I think I made the right decision).

  Now, flash forward to 2000, the next election we lose:

  Al Gore wins 20 states + DC.

  Nine are states that Dukakkis won. The other ten are states that Bill Clinton carried in both 1992 and 1996.

  Note that Al Gore won these states without any discernible charisma (remember, this is a man who was beat in the 1988 primaries by Michael Dukakkis), whilst running a terrible campaign, and without the benefit of having Ross Perot siphon off Republican votes as Clinton had in both 1992 and 1996 (and with the added disadvantage of having Ralph Nader to siphon votes from him).

  Then in 2004, John Kerry wins all of the Al Gore states with the following exceptions: he also wins New Hampshire (which Gore lost) and he loses Iowa and New Mexico (which Gore carried).

  It is worth noting that Kerry lost both Iowa and New Mexico by less than a percentage point.

  Now when I look at those facts, I see an electoral map that has gradually shifted towards the Democrats in the decades since 1972. It says to me that you can run stiff, awkward candidates like Al Gore and John Kerry, and still come a hair's breath from winning the presidency.

  John Kerry WAS Michael Dukakkis, and he took twice as many states as Dukakkis did.

  During this time, we went from having NO safe states to having eighteen. In fact, the Republicans are now in a position that if they don't win both Ohio and Florida, it's extremely difficult for them to win a presidential election.

  Now, whoever the Democratic candidate is, they only need to be a little bit better than Al Gore or Kerry to win.

  I'm willing to wager than either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama can run a better general election campaign than Al Gore or John Kerry.

  Also, John McCain is not as formidable a candidate than either Clinton or Obama are making him out to be for propaganda purposes.

  Both of them are making him out to be well-nigh invincible so that they can put themselves forward as the only candidate to beat him.

  The truth: John McCain is Bob Dole.

  Do you know what candidate Barack Obama most reminds me of? Bill Clinton in 1992. It was the first election I ever voted in, and it was the only time I was really voting for the candidate, not just voting against the Republican candidate.

  History moves on. Things change. You can't live in 1972 forever. That election happened at the beginning of a thirty-five year period of Republican ascendency (which was preceded by a thirty-five year of Democratic ascendancy).

  And just maybe if this country is stupid enough not to see after thirty-five years that McGovern should have beaten Nixon in 1972*, we deserve everything we get.

  By the way, sorry about the "sh#t in your eyes" line - I couldn't resist after being patronized like that. No hard feelings?

  *(You do remember that Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace, right?)

  Permalink Thursday, April 24, 2008 08:42 PM