Posted on 07/20/2008 11:58:51 AM PDT by leonard33
John McCain is surely the dullest candidate for president we've had in years and all signs point to his defeat come November.
Barack Obama appears to be a shoo-in and it's all over but the voting.
I say - not so fast.
There's no question that Obama has positioned himself as the second coming of John F. Kennedy, especially with this trip overseas where he's being adored, namely in Europe, just as he's adored here in the USA. In fact, all the trappings are there for a repeat performance. He's doing the JFK rag.
But wait a minute. With all that going for JFK - the multitudes swooning for him -- well, after the votes were counted, JFK won by the slimmest margin within the 20th century. True, he outnumbered Richard Nixon in the Electoral College 303 to 219, but, when the POPULAR vote was tallied, Nixon and JFK were in a virtual dead-heat. JFK won by a nose.
I'm old enough to remember this, but in fact-checking it for my novel of JFK and the 1960s (THE DAYS OF THE BITTER END) I was astonished all over again to find that, in the end, JFK was ahead of Nixon, nationally, by no more than 100,000 votes - and there is still talk that even that number was achieved through some hanky panky. (To put it another way, JFK beat Nixon by two thirds of one percent, 49.7 to 49.5.)
This is starting to sound like Obama versus McCain; on the one hand the charismatic candidate, Obama, and then, well, then there's McCain who falls asleep at his own speeches. Even Republicans find him generic or less. (Republican Light.) There have been no head-to-head debates between these two, as of yet, but they still keep going at each other and certainly Obama always gets the better result.
So did JFK, or so it seemed. Those Kennedy-Nixon debates were televised and it's part of our heritage to remember that Nixon came across as bumbling, gloomy and sweaty, while JFK was viewed as articulate, cool and princely. Yet, and yet, people who listened to the same debates on RADIO picked Nixon as the winner. (At worst, a draw.)
Still, observers (such as myself, a huge fan of Kennedy's) were sure that JFK would win this thing in a walk.
[Caution: If you think I've come here to bash Nixon, wrong. He had admirable qualities aplenty, as when he helped save Israel in 1973.)
JFK had everything going for him. Nixon? Practically nothing. (When viewed as a popularity contest.)
Nixon had Pat, a wonderful first-lady (in waiting) in her own right - but she was no Jackie. Another plus for JFK; a minus for Nixon.
JFK was handsome. Nixon was not. The Kennedys, all of them, were photogenic and fun.
Nixon was not fun!
JFK's speeches (like Obama's today) thrilled the people. Nixon did not thrill!
JFK gave us hope and promise. Nixon (or so it seemed) only gave us politics.
JFK offered us new frontiers. Nixon offered nothing except more of the same (or so it seemed).
JFK was youthful. Nixon was old (or so it seemed).
JFK galvanized the youth of the America. Nixon's appeal was strictly middle-brow (or so it seemed).
JFK charmed America's intellectuals as he charmed everyone else. Nixon charmed nobody (or so it seemed) and was thought to be un-read.
What a shock, then, to find that when Huntley and Brinkley and Walter Cronkite kept posting the results, Behold --
JFK, who had so electrified the nation, and the world, was barely making it, and Nixon, who put us to sleep, was gaining!
Nixon had just as many Americans in his pocket as JFK.
We were astonished to learn that all this time there was "another America" that had chosen this moment to speak up.
McCain? Obama?
Sound familiar?
About the author: Jack Engelhard's latest novel, THE BATHSHEBA DEADLINE, now in paperback, places journalism at the center of our war on terror and has been cited by best-selling author Robert Spencer ("The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam") as "a rousing thriller about clashing civilizations" and by Letha Hadady as "a towering literary achievement." Engelhard wrote the international bestselling novel INDECENT PROPOSAL that was translated into more than 22 languages and turned into a Paramount motion picture starring Robert Redford and Demi Moore.
I’ve glanced at articles that show the young guy winning the electoral vote. How will John Mc fair?
1/5th of a percent!
Yeah, but remember that JFK won with the Chicago cemetary vote. Obama has that sown up too.
One correlation of 2008 to 1960 is that Obama will have a Mayor Daley bringing in the votes from Chicago’s cemetary districts.
John McCain will blast conservatives if he loses, and then change parties.
Most objective historians today agree that the election was stolen for Kennedy in Illinois and Texas.
In Cook County.....well, you know Cook County....thousands of dead “voted”.
In Texas along the Mexican border, thousands of Mexican-Americans “voted”......many were apparently not citizens, something we are seeing again in larger numbers.
Nixon quite righty believed that the electoral votes of those two states were his. Thus, in reality, he won.
Dick was quite bitter about it, but because of the tense international situation against the advice of top party insiders.....Nixon, unlike Gore, refused to go to court.
Some believe that Nixon’s “loss” in 1960 led him to become paranoid enough to bring together the Plumbers in 1972.....an election he could not lose.....but one in which he could later be forced out of office.
It's gotta be pretty bad math for a mathematical bonehead like myself to recognize it.
It looks more like one fifth (two tenths) of one percent to me.
This race is more like the 1976 race between Gerald Ford, probably one of the less assertive of Presidential candidates ever to be put up for the office (and the only one who was NEVER elected), and Jimmy Carter, who was a “whole new” kind of Democrat, from the “new South”. Despite the relative inexperience of Carter, he came across as an “electrifying” candidate in comparison to Ford.
Gerald Ford began focusing on his experience that was actually relevant to the office of the Presidency, while highlighting and contrasting the very same qualities lacking in Carter. Ford very nearly pulled it off, despite the lopsided polls early in the race, and the almost crushing negatives he had piled up with the Nixon pardon.
Think McCain will pick up from the Gerald Ford experience, or is he going to continue to “reach across” to the “other side of the aisle” once again?
America is so screwed.
The way this “election” is shaping up, I expect to see the liberal “media” celebrating the fact that “over 500 million “americans” voted in November. A new “historical” record and something we “should all be proud of.”
Obama is no JFK.. he’s not that stupid..
Don’t forget that (1) a lot of dead people in Texas voted for JFK and that (2) Kennedy, Sr. paid for a lot of votes.
Polls miss one very important group:Clintonites and women who feel they have been cast aside by the democratic party. How many of them will stay home or throw their votes to John McCain?
So? If Kennedy loses Illinois he still wins with 276 electoral votes.
I don’t think anyone can compare either candidate with that election. JFK is light years ahead in preperation and served the nation in the military. McCain has little in similarity to Nixon.
In addition, Obama is the farthest thing from a lock, no honest person can even try to make that case.
Obama is disliked by as many people in America as those who “adore” him...
He really should qualify this - "dullest candidate in 4 years." (JFKerry anyone?)
“In the aftermath of that down-to-the-wire election, there were angry Republican charges that Daley’s Democratic machine had padded the ballots in precincts they controlled to make sure that Kennedy piled up enough votes in Chicago and other parts of Cook County to carry Illinois.”
“Comparable accusations were leveled against Democratic officials in Texas – where the party apparatus was largely controlled by Kennedy’s running mate, Lyndon Johnson – and that was another critical state that JFK carried by a slim margin.”
“If those two states had been won by Nixon, he and not Kennedy would have had the majority of electoral votes needed to capture the presidency.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/11/09/politics/main248266.shtml
I think McCain will win, though I’m not willing to put any money on it. But regardless of which one wins, I think they’ll do it with fewer than 300 electoral votes.
But Illinois isn't a swing state and hasn't been a swing state in 2 decades. Increasing Obama's margin in Illinois does nothing to help him win the electoral vote. In 1960 Illinois was both a swing state and one of the top states by population, and Chicago was the second largest city in the US.
Thousands. I know some of them and they are not going to forget how they think the Democrat party treated Hillary. And they have the money to back up their action and aren't afraid to use it against their perceived enemies. One of those enemies they see just happens to be Nancy Pelosi which couldn't make me any happier.
Kennedy took Texas by more than 46,000 votes. That’s more votes than Nixon took California by.
There's a lot of cemetaries there. And lots of illegals too nowadays.
Any McCain speech would render an A.D.D. clinic into a state of narcosis at high noon. Even after a heavy serving of Twinkies and Cherry Koolaid.
Here! That's me. No question Nixon was more impressive.
JFK was a "great" president solely because he was telegenic.
He became president because of the fraud in Chicago and LBJ's Texas -- and Nixon refused to pursue the fraud charges because the disruption would harm America. Imagine that!
What's BHO got? Almost the entire MSM. It's Swoon over Obami time again.
what is this constant crap hussien is the next coming of JFK???? though a rat-winger JFK was not a far out leftist like hussien....
“JFK’s speeches (like Obama’s today) thrilled the people. Nixon did not thrill!”
That so many people were thrilled by Obama’s speeches speaks very ill of this nation. Anyone can blather on about, not white, not black, but one nation, blah, blah, blah. But that sort of puffery doesn’t resolve one political disagreement, or convince one person to accept the idea of another. It’s just feel good, cotton candy, pie-in-the-sky irrelevancies when it comes to our political system.
Obama always sounded too much like a con man, or he reminded me of Elmer Gantry, so I never considered him a good speaker. To be a good speaker, something logical and relevant has to be a part of the speech. He was and is just a cotton candy vendor saying little worth listening to. And, when he does try to address serious issues and make a case for some position, he really starts sounding like the lightweight that he is.
Never impressed with the guy.
It’s so hard to imagine either McCain or Obama winning in ‘08. Both look like sure losers.
If McCain loses, he’ll retire, maybe serve out his term first. Looks to me like he’s failing, mentally.
John McCain will also blast conservatives if he wins, and then change parties! It really doesn’t matter when the discussion is about the behaviors of John McCain! This IS John McCain that we are talking about, and he truly continues to be a political maverick!
I could stay awake during a town meeting, but I doubt I’d make it all the way through one of his teleprompter speeches. The only thing he has going for him there is being on time and ending on time.
Great observation:
1. Illinois starts out in Obama’s column.
2. Obama doesn’t have an LBJ (the most crooked Congressman in US History)
3. Obama doesn’t have a pop with the equivalent of $10Billion in today’s money buying up votes.
4. Obama is not a former Naval officer war hero.
5. Obama IS a former Muslim.
6. For better or worse Obama is black.
7. Obama has racist and anti-american friends.
8. Obama has thrown a couple women under the bus to get where he is and Hillary supporters are pissed.
9. Obama has no experience.
10. We are fighting two wars and Obama is not viewed as a viable commander in chief by over 2/3s of the population.
11. Blacks are miffed that Obama keeps telling them how to behave when he is not even black.
12. All of Obama’s constituents are the same folks who like to blow off general elections.
All of these things are different from JFK and JFK had to cheat for that extra 1/5 of one percent. Good luck Barack.
The media and the europeans will all be scratching their heads once again come November 6th.
Again ???
I'm not so sure about the "former" bit.
Of course, McCain has alienated a large contingent of conservatives who still say they won't vote for him. I hear this from friends almost every day.
yes,we know candidate x didn't win, but we need to CLOSE the PRIMARIES - to stop DEMOCRATS from voting in the GOP primaries. We also need to strengthen our bench - by electing CONSERVATIVES. (Conservatives in the Northeast are not the same as in the south! yes, we are FISCALLY CONSEVATIVE here but SOCIALLY MODERATE. (Abortion, gay marriage is not what we care about! We care about taxes!)
Vote McCain - Obama will screw tup the USA!
If he loses - he'll blast the CRYBABIES on FR who stayed home or voted 3rd Party!
Where’s Jackie??
Pray for W and Our Troops
To ask me to vote for Obama, would be like asking me to vote for Satan. I just could not do it.
Think McCain will call and congratulate Satan on election day?
To ask me to vote for Obama, would be like asking me to vote for Satan. I just could not do it.
Think McCain will call and congratulate Satan on election day?
I am giving McCain every opportunity to earn my vote. All he has to do is throw me a few crumbs from the table like stop pushing gorebal warming. Or amnesty for illegal aliens. Or name a VP to the right of Mike Hucksterbee.
But so far, he won't do it. He's not entitled to our votes just because BH Obama is so much worse. He has to earn them.
LOL, that’s funny!
Thanks!
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.