|
Ford was the incumbent, but an unelected incumbent, which skews that variable. When he pardoned Nixon he lost significant support. He never fully recovered among that demographic. It would have helped if he had gotten the "Poland" question right on the televised debate, too. The debate moderator offered Ford a second chance for clarification and Ford dug in his heels deeper.
An acquaintence of mine in New York City said she resented having to choose that year between "a Sunday school teacher and an elderly Boy Scout." A lot of Democrats didn't see Carter as a "maverick," although many praised the distance he represented from the George Wallace era for Southern governors. Wallace ran in the primaries that year and Carter whupped him. Florida, really, was the Old George Wallace's last stand in the primaries. After that we saw an Updated George Wallace on racial equality.
Just my take, but one way to look at that presidential contest in 76 is that it finished so close in the final voting because both men were bland. Neither one was "maverick," in this assessment, neither represented fiery ideological reform or were felt to be at the vanguard of a particularly sharp public issue. Rockefeller was shown the door and Ford picked Dole as his hatchet man; anyone who wanted to know why Dole made a piss-poor presidential candidate in the 90s had only to consider his public performance as Ford's running mate in 76. Notably terrible.
Carter did better in choosing Mondale, but Mondale was more of an assurance gesture, IMO. Stalwart Democrat from Hubert Humphrey land, good at the strong handshake, reassuring to County Dems coast to coast that this ticket is solid if not especially dynamic. Eugene McCarthy once said that Walter Mondale "has the soul of a vice president," this in an era when vice presidents kept their mouths shut, dressed nicely at international leaders' funerals, and didn't bring much to bear on actual decision-making. Pre-Cheney, in other words.
Unlike Dick Cheney, Walter Mondale would never wear a snow parka to a Holocaust memorial service.
Ford was ultimately the drab stumbler and the Right fell in love with Reagan. Ted Kennedy challenged Carter in part because feeling burgeoned that Carter's administration did not sufficiently represent labor and other key constituencies. There were also significant grumblings about his Cabinet and the rarer but telling moments that subtracted from his "maverick" image, such as the firing of Bella Abzug. Ask an older feminist or pro-feminist male what they thought of Carter firing Bella Abzug, and you have several pieces of the argument for Kennedy's challenge.
Carter attempted to get hostages out of Iran. The effort failed. But the effort had been made and in the overview, peace efforts in the Middle East did far, far, far better under Carter than under anyone since, and especially either Bush and Dubya particularly. So the international picture has changed considerably in the two time frames, with the Republican Party seen as recalcitrant assholes and Carter and Bill Clinton as trying valiantly to achieve peace.
Obama, given that he now has no less than 50% odds of being our next president (far better odds than that, IMO), would inherit an Oval Office which has been disgraced by its 8-year inhabitant. Gerald Ford, stumbler and bumbler though he was perceived to be, was never considered morally bankrupt as this younger more treacherous Bush is considered. Dubya's approval ratings are at historic lows, and justifiably so. McCain is hobbled with and very significantly endorsed 8 years of corruption, deceit, pointless bloodshed, more deceit, a deliberate undoing of what is GOOD in government, and a long string of the worst appointments to Cabinet & other positions in the history of the United States.
As well, McCain sounds like a walking corpse. He sounds as if insects have chomped away at large parts of his brain and very little blood and oxygen are getting through. I expect him at the first presidential debate to be wheeled out on a guerney.
I don't know anybody who thinks we have a drive-thru landslide at hand without effort, but I know lots of people willing to work to achieve a huge victory percentage and national mandate, and that there have been such landslides under certain conditions in presidential history. This year could be one of those.
I like our chances for attaining that goal and I think we have the candidate to achieve it with.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
