Implied comparisons between Sanders and McGovern or Sanders and any Democrat who has lost the election for president, while no insult to either McGovern or most other Democrat "losers," is another hackneyed attempt to paint Sanders as a loser. The Times ought to get over itself. Or, maybe we should be glad that the issue--which lots of Democrats and Republicans bring up--is discussed now and then quickly dismissed for what it is--one more attempt to focus on junior-high analysis & avoid the significant issues Sanders addresses. (No insult intended for the junior high crowd either--today's students are probably pretty savvy about politics and lies, at least one hopes so.) If you are really serious about this country's future and this election, get out of your insular bubble, stop pandering to special interests, and listen to what most Americans think.
1
I was kept from voting for McGovern because my name was not on our apartment mailbox. I wonder how many other votes for him were suppressed.
Politicians' nature is to praise themselves and badmouth their opponents. So it has always been and will be.
But for Senator Sanders, I would be surprised if a socialist of Brooklynite Judaic origin won the Democratic nomination and, if yes, made it to the throne of the Union. So far, John F. Kennedy, as a Roman Catholic, and Barak Obama, as a half-white, seem to be the only exceptions to the WASP Presidents elect.
But for Senator Sanders, I would be surprised if a socialist of Brooklynite Judaic origin won the Democratic nomination and, if yes, made it to the throne of the Union. So far, John F. Kennedy, as a Roman Catholic, and Barak Obama, as a half-white, seem to be the only exceptions to the WASP Presidents elect.
This article ignores vital historical context. If the context was included, readers would realize Dunlap's "parallels" about Sanders are questionable:
1. In the Watergate Tapes, Nixon implied his campaign forged the "Canuck Letter of 1972" which claimed that Ed Muskie loathed French Canadians and minorities. Washington Post reporter Marilyn Berger wrote that Nixon White House staffer Ken Clawson forged the letter.
2. Nixon had journalists favorable to the Republican Party embellish Muskie's reaction to the forged letter and to attacks upon his wife. Reporter Jim Naughton of The New York Times -- who was present at Muskie's speeches -- claimed Muskie's so-called "reaction" was slanted by pro-Nixon journalists.
3. McGovern lost the General Election not because of "fringe views," but due to the unfolding backstory of his Vice Presidential choice Thomas Eagleton. During the campaign, Eagleton's emotional instability and sojourns in mental institutions caused voters to question McGovern's judgement. Nixon used Eagleton's antics to sledge-hammer McGovern. Eagleton's previous insults about McGovern were the nail in the coffin.
In sum, Dunlap's asserted "parallels" to Sanders and his "fringe views" are unfounded. Unlike Muskie, Sanders hasn't had an "emotional meltdown" about a forged letter. Unlike McGovern, Sanders hasn't chosen a crazy Vice Presidential candidate who destroys him. This context should have been included in the article. "Fringe views" indeed.
1. In the Watergate Tapes, Nixon implied his campaign forged the "Canuck Letter of 1972" which claimed that Ed Muskie loathed French Canadians and minorities. Washington Post reporter Marilyn Berger wrote that Nixon White House staffer Ken Clawson forged the letter.
2. Nixon had journalists favorable to the Republican Party embellish Muskie's reaction to the forged letter and to attacks upon his wife. Reporter Jim Naughton of The New York Times -- who was present at Muskie's speeches -- claimed Muskie's so-called "reaction" was slanted by pro-Nixon journalists.
3. McGovern lost the General Election not because of "fringe views," but due to the unfolding backstory of his Vice Presidential choice Thomas Eagleton. During the campaign, Eagleton's emotional instability and sojourns in mental institutions caused voters to question McGovern's judgement. Nixon used Eagleton's antics to sledge-hammer McGovern. Eagleton's previous insults about McGovern were the nail in the coffin.
In sum, Dunlap's asserted "parallels" to Sanders and his "fringe views" are unfounded. Unlike Muskie, Sanders hasn't had an "emotional meltdown" about a forged letter. Unlike McGovern, Sanders hasn't chosen a crazy Vice Presidential candidate who destroys him. This context should have been included in the article. "Fringe views" indeed.
10
I campaigned for McGovern (and actually won a 50-1 family bet on him being nominated that year.) BUT it wasn't just Eagleton. It was everything, neatly summarized as "Acid, Abortion, and Amnesty" (for draft dodgers).
Even when Nixon wasn't committing illegal dirty tricks, he was masterfully pigeonholing McGovern precisely as "fringe": the candidate of the hippies (notwithstanding his World War II service as a bomber pilot).
What's the old saying? “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes”? The GOP is readying the next verse.
Even when Nixon wasn't committing illegal dirty tricks, he was masterfully pigeonholing McGovern precisely as "fringe": the candidate of the hippies (notwithstanding his World War II service as a bomber pilot).
What's the old saying? “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes”? The GOP is readying the next verse.
I think you're way overestimating the effect of the Eagleton fiasco. Nixon was way ahead before that; Eagleton was just the frosting on Nixon's cake.
You seem to think that the Nixonian dirty tricks distinguish 1972 from 2016: but the Koch-fueled Republicans have been doing this to Hillary for years, and Cruz could not wait until the general election to start his trickery.
You seem to think that the Nixonian dirty tricks distinguish 1972 from 2016: but the Koch-fueled Republicans have been doing this to Hillary for years, and Cruz could not wait until the general election to start his trickery.
1
I remember that election and what you say is true but, the Repugs won't unleash their dirty tricks until Bernie has the nomination. At that point you will not believe the stuff they'll come up with.
And McGovern was soundly throttled in the general election, just as the ranting Bernie would be.
8
But all of their candidates live on the 'lunatic fringe,' even their front runner: Trump. He rants and raves about Mexicans and Muslims, but has he produced one sample of thought out, well balanced policy? Me thinx not!
McGovern's and Sanders' campaigns for economic justice as "ranting."
Decades ago, my Mother and I had the great pleasure of meeting Mr. McGovern at a book signing. My Mom told Mr. McGovern he was my hero. I blushed and added "Along with my parents".
Imagine the direction the U.S. could have taken under his leadership. We missed that opportunity and have since allowed our government to be hijacked by corporate billionaires.
No candidate has compared to him since...until now, as we have Bernie.
Imagine the direction the U.S. could have taken under his leadership. We missed that opportunity and have since allowed our government to be hijacked by corporate billionaires.
No candidate has compared to him since...until now, as we have Bernie.
7
People I knew then were shocked that Nixon won, and by the large margin he did, because everyone they knew voted for McGovern, and he was obviously so much better than the evil Nixon. I guess they felt Berned.
8
So it's up to those of us who are feelin' the Bern to make sure that Bernie's supporters get out to the polls. Anyone who wants to help can go to berniesanders.com. There's lots to be done.
Same here, but what it proves is that we didn't know very many people! Especially mainstream Americans. Senator McGovern was a fine man who loved our country and I am grateful to him for his lifelong service to our nation. Wish we had more like him!
4
Who in 1972 was shocked at Nixon's win? Maybe a few voters in Massachusetts? You must have been hanging with a pretty insular group of people.
2
did anyone really think McGovern could win ?