You’re right, it was not criticism of McGovern. My mistake.
You’re also correct that it’s not criticism of Muskie, which was the point of the poster you quoted. You simply chose to jump in with “Oh, boy, I can jump on Nixon here!” though it wasn’t relevant to the post you quoted.
I was gonna use that quote somewhere in this thread!
It would have been just fine all by itself. You didn’t need to quote a poster referring to Thompson’s criticism of Muskie as a springboard to post his criticism of Nixon. Well, at least you quoted an actual talented writer instead of that idiotic wiki that you’ve been tending to quote for the last few years.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29605
Reducing military spending in the middle of the Cold War, the first adoption by the Democratic Party of the “right to be Different” (ie multiculturalism), and I believe additionally McGovern supported legalized abortion.
[QUOTE=Garry Trudeau]
Pollster: “If a Presidential election were held tomorrow, and the two candidates were Richard Nixon and the Easter bunny, whom would you vote for?”
Husband: “Wow…that’s a toughie…”
Wife: “I’d go with the dumb rabbit.”
[/QUOTE]
Can’t forget this: Don’t change dicks in the middle of a screw, vote Nixon in '72!
Why didn’t the Left like Muskie? Still sore that he’d been Humphrey’s running mate four years earlier, when HHH was slow to break with LBJ over Vietnam?
I was 'way too young to vote in 1972, but it’s the first election that I personally recall. Our house was the only one in our rther conservative neighborhood with a McGovern sign out front. McGovern was not exactly a firecracker as a candidate, but he was a good, honest man, a liberal and a war hero (George McGovern - Wikipedia). He’d definitely have my vote over Tricky Dick.
Those all sound wonderful to me, but I can see how some might disagree. I can’t, however, see how you can call them “highly objectionable.”
Neither Wikipedia nor RationalWiki is in any way idiotic.
That was certainly part of it. Some considered him too cautious, too close to party bosses and big labor. But most of all he was a lackluster and ineffective campaigner.
Darn, at some point over the years I discarded or lost my copy of Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail. Here is one chapter which is posted online which will give you some of the flavor.
Well since I’m one of those who disagree, I’d find them objectionable.
[QUOTE=Elendil’s Heir]
Why didn’t the Left like Muskie? Still sore that he’d been Humphrey’s running mate four years earlier, when HHH was slow to break with LBJ over Vietnam?
[/QUOTE]
So the Democrats rejected Muskie as “a lackluster and ineffective campainger” and then nominated McGovern? That makes sense.:rolleyes:
In any case, Nixon was probably going win the election decisively. The Democrats were still too divided and nearly everything was going in his favor. Too bad Tricky Dick was too insecure and paranoid to realize this.
Considering that I did vote for McGovern in both the Wisconsin primary and the November general election, I picked him.
In retrospect I might have voted for someone else in the primary. I don’t recall all the candidates, but aside from McGovern I recall Wallace, Jackson, and Humphrey. I think Muskie might have been on the ballot, but his candidacy lay in ruins by that time.
I recall Wallace doing much more poorly in '72 than he had in '68, which was gratifying to me. (His shooting was not.)
I wonder how much of the destruction of Muskie was done by the Nixon dirty tricks campaign (lead by Donald Segretti and assisted by Karl Rove) and how much was self-inflicted.
Jackson was way too right wing for me. Nowadays he’d be somewhere to the left of Bill Clinton, but at the time he was a fairly conservative Democrat. Humphrey still had the taint of Chicago 1968 in my mind.