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

To: Impy; AuH2ORepublican; Clemenza; LS; Clintonfatigued; BillyBoy

We lost too many in ‘58. The biggest Senate fiasco in the popular vote era.

Young was a leftist moonbat, and a pretty nasty piece of work (probably enhanced by senility, for which we see a lot of these days in the Senate) and ‘64 saved his butt, at least for the general (curiously, this was where John Glenn announced his run to challenge Young from the right, but withdrew after his household accident — obvious fears that Young wouldn’t be able to hold the seat against Taft, Jr., who was the nominee that year). Curiously, had Taft won, it’s possible his seniority might’ve saved him in 1976, but perhaps not.

Of course, when Lausche was in the Senate in the ‘50s, there were still Conservative Democrats and you could get elected appealing to socially Conservative White working-class ethnics within the party (at least in the north). That’s gone now. It didn’t work for Lausche anymore when he ran for a 3rd term in 1968, as the moonbat element was already taking over (he lost the nomination to Jack Gilligan, who would lose to RINO Saxbe, only to parlay his exposure to run for Governor successfully in 1970).

Lausche, of course, despised the leftist rise in the Democrat party. He detested his seatmate Young (though he apparently got on with Bricker), and refused to endorse Gilligan, either. His best approach would’ve been to have switched parties around 1966, as that might’ve given him a chance to make sufficient inroads to have won the GOP nomination in ‘68 (if Taft or Saxbe had decided to challenge him). Of course, he was 73 then, and age actually mattered to some back then. As it turned out, he lived until almost 95 (dying in 1990). Probably could’ve remained in the Senate until 1980 under the right circumstances (though surviving ‘74 would’ve been tough, especially against Glenn).

I’m sure you also read the speculation that Ike wanted to lure Lausche onto the ‘52 ticket. That would’ve set up a Catholic vs. Catholic scenario in ‘60, since he likely would’ve been the nominee against JFK. It would’ve been funny, since Lausche would’ve had to have chosen a Westerner for the ticket (since there were no Southerners in the GOP beyond a few Congressmen)... so his VP would’ve been Senator Nixon (then 10 years in that office), unless GOP Senate leader Bill Knowland had not made that awful attempt to switch jobs with Gov. Goodwin Knight in ‘58...


224 posted on 07/11/2014 11:03:35 PM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Resist We Much)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies ]


To: fieldmarshaldj

I saw this and thought you might be interested:

http://www.amazon.com/Frank-J-Lausche-Political-Maverick/dp/1882203496


226 posted on 07/12/2014 10:34:58 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued (The War on Drugs is Big Government statism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies ]

To: fieldmarshaldj

I understand none of the Tafts were much good except for Robert, Sr., and he even boosted urban renewal, which destroyed low-cost housing in the central cities.


238 posted on 07/12/2014 8:14:45 PM PDT by Theodore R. (Liberals keep winning; so the American people must now be all-liberal all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies ]

To: fieldmarshaldj
I’m sure you also read the speculation that Ike wanted to lure Lausche onto the ‘52 ticket.

Well, it would have made a lot more sense than McCain almost picking Lieberman. I'd like the think the convention would have rejected that choice, if he'd been so foolish as to go through with it.

240 posted on 07/13/2014 1:08:30 AM PDT by Impy (Think for yourself)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies ]

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