Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is 2008 going to be 1968?

Posted on 06/03/2007 5:30:23 PM PDT by Democratshavenobrains

Many people thought the election of 2004 somewhat resembled the one in 1948. For example, Truman and Bush were both Southern Presidents up for re-election who were associated with unpopular wars. Dewey and Kerry were also both thought of as elitists from the Northeast.

But it seems like this election is closely resembling the 1968 election. LBJ and Bush are not running but the wars they fought were and are still ongoing. Thankfully, Dick Cheney is not running so the Hubert Humphrey parellel doesn't exist. Many people think that if Bobby Kennedy had lived and won the nomination, he would have beaten Nixon.

So as I see it, if the Dems are able to paint the Republican nominee as Bush's lackey, like we did with Hubert Humphrey, there is a greater chance they will win.

However, the Republican base should be a little more happy with Bush than the Democratic base was with LBJ by 1968, shouldn't they? Bush has nominated good judges, managed the economy well, and at least mouthed the pieties of the Pro-Life movement. Or am I insulting Bush by even comparing him to LBJ in the first place?


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

1 posted on 06/03/2007 5:30:24 PM PDT by Democratshavenobrains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains

Welcome to my point of view, that I’ve stated here a few times.

The Dems will be hamstrung by their Code Pink crowd in the same way that the hippies of 1968 hurt HHH’s chances against Nixon. The nominee will have to say “out now” as much as he/she can to keep them on the plantation, but then will have to prove that they’re ready to run a way.

In fact, I’ll go on record to say that Iraq killed JFKerry’s chances in the last election for exactly that same reason!


2 posted on 06/03/2007 5:40:01 PM PDT by TWohlford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains
...Truman and Bush were both Southern Presidents up for re-election...

Truman was "Southern"? That seems quite a stretch. Maybe the Bootheel of extreme southeastern Missouri can be considered "Southern," but Truman was from Independence, near Kansas City, and was a pawn of the Kansas City labor union bosses. Not much "Southern" about Harry.

3 posted on 06/03/2007 5:42:33 PM PDT by southernnorthcarolina (These are my principals. If you don't like them, I have others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: southernnorthcarolina

I live in SW MO and everyone that I’ve met south of I-70 considers themselves “southern”.


5 posted on 06/03/2007 5:53:43 PM PDT by ExpatGator (Extending logic since 1961.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tall_Texan

We don’t need anyone getting knocked off. The death of their political careers, but not the end of their lives. These people have families. I do hope that a Republican wins the White House though.


6 posted on 06/03/2007 5:54:04 PM PDT by DrGunsforHands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ExpatGator

The Truman farm in Grandview is about 15 miles south of I-70, the Truman home in Independence is about 3 miles north.

Does he qualify?

I grew up in KC, and it seems northerners always considered us southern and southerners considered us northern or midwestern.


7 posted on 06/03/2007 6:04:56 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (Offendo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains
Many people think that if Bobby Kennedy had lived and won the nomination, he would have beaten Nixon

No way! RFK was too left-wing for America. He could only have won if Wallace had managed to siphon off more conservative votes than he did.

8 posted on 06/03/2007 6:05:57 PM PDT by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains

And a two-term Vice President with no personality who left office eight years ago is likely to win...so it is 1968 in reverse. ;)


9 posted on 06/03/2007 6:07:04 PM PDT by Mr. Jeeves ("Wise men don't need to debate; men who need to debate are not wise." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: southernnorthcarolina
Truman was "Southern"? That seems quite a stretch. Maybe the Bootheel of extreme southeastern Missouri can be considered "Southern," but Truman was from Independence, near Kansas City, and was a pawn of the Kansas City labor union bosses. Not much "Southern" about Harry.

Missouri is southern. But seeing from your handle name, I thing your are directionally challenged.

10 posted on 06/03/2007 6:07:38 PM PDT by Bommer (Global Warming: The only warming phenomena that occurs in the Summer and ends in the Winter!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Jeeves

“Does he qualify?”

Heck, I don’t know. Did he eat grits?

Seriously, he must have had some southern boy in him. After all he did nuke them Jap fellers.


11 posted on 06/03/2007 6:09:11 PM PDT by ExpatGator (Extending logic since 1961.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains

Missouri is Southern? That’s kind of a stretch.


12 posted on 06/03/2007 6:17:11 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Fred Thompson/John Bolton 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains
So as I see it, if the Dems are able to paint the Republican nominee as Bush's lackey, like we did with Hubert Humphrey, there is a greater chance they will win.

IOW, in order for the R candidate to win 08, he has to campaign against Bush, not Hillary Clinton.

I hate to speak ill of Bush as he has done some good things, especially with judicial appointments. The long term positive effects of that might even outweigh much of his bad choices, but this immigration stuff is going to destroy us as a people if something isn't done, and Bush isn't going to do anything about it.
13 posted on 06/03/2007 6:20:32 PM PDT by JamesP81 (Isaiah 10:1 - "Woe to those who enact evil statutes")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Missouri is Southern? That’s kind of a stretch.

Depends on the region. Down around Charleston, Sikeston, and Caruthersville they're pretty darned southern around there. It's one of those places that you can have a rebel flag on your truck without being a social pariah. Granted, Missouri folks are a little different than most southerners, but in that area of Missouri I contend that they are still recognizeable as southerners.
14 posted on 06/03/2007 6:24:33 PM PDT by JamesP81 (Isaiah 10:1 - "Woe to those who enact evil statutes")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains
For example, Truman and Bush were both Southern Presidents up for re-election who were associated with unpopular wars.

What unpopular war was Truman associated with in 1948?

15 posted on 06/03/2007 6:28:25 PM PDT by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill

Yeah, but he probably would have ran more to the middle if he got the nomination.

You could say that Fred Thompson is our RFK. Except he isn’t just running on name recognition.


16 posted on 06/03/2007 6:30:04 PM PDT by Democratshavenobrains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains

No


17 posted on 06/03/2007 6:30:47 PM PDT by Petronski (Keep your eye on www.fredthompson.com very soon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains

18 posted on 06/03/2007 6:31:20 PM PDT by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains

One thing that LBJ had that Bush never did was an iron fist over the legislative branch. Even when the GOP had both houses, Bush was always treated as the outsider, even by his own party. LBJ kicked legislative asses and kept long lists of names.

If the GOP loses is 2008, we did it to oursevwes by losing focus and pandering to the squishy middle.


19 posted on 06/03/2007 6:34:22 PM PDT by berstbubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Democratshavenobrains

The modern democratic party has never won an election - it’s just that the modern republican party sometimes chooses to lose by running weak candidates based on seniority or financial connections.


20 posted on 06/03/2007 6:36:05 PM PDT by Old_Mil (Duncan Hunter in 2008! A Veteran, A Patriot, A Reagan Republican... http://www.gohunter08.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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