Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: WaPo/ABC Poll from last Feb, 77% of Liberal Democrats support use of Drones [View all]graham4anything
(11,464 posts)71. LBJ vs. Nixon head to head, LBJ would have won. Ugly match, but LBJ would have won
HHH barely lost and he was a bad candidate.
LBJ would have done better than HHH, because LBJ was able to campaign on his accomplishments, while all HHH had was the albatross of Vietnam.
Eugene McCarthy (like George McGovern) may have been helleva nice people, but neither was ever seriously considered as being able to win.
And of course, you forget something-democratic votes were split by Wallace.
LBJ would have negated Wallace and that alone would have led to victory.
(convienient to forget the racism Wallace brought to the democratic party.)
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
91 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
WaPo/ABC Poll from last Feb, 77% of Liberal Democrats support use of Drones [View all]
stevenleser
Feb 2013
OP
Supporting a drone policy "which administration officials refuse to discuss"
MotherPetrie
Feb 2013
#4
DU is more critical of Drones than Democrats as a whole as my DU poll in GD suggests
stevenleser
Feb 2013
#13
Again. The use of Drones and this most recent policy on drone strikes of Americans are not the same.
Dawgs
Feb 2013
#90
I guess that means killing people without trial is now a "liberal" value.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2013
#15
You have decided to interpret it that way. I see it the way the Magistrate explains it.
stevenleser
Feb 2013
#20
So, where's the part about killing people without trial being "liberal"?
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2013
#24
That is a separate issue. All Liberals and Democrats would answer the same way.
stevenleser
Feb 2013
#35
LBJ was the greatest. I supported him then and know. He would have beaten Nixon.
graham4anything
Feb 2013
#36
He carried on a genocidal war against people that posed no threat to this country.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2013
#39
LBJ would have beaten Nixon in 1968. And Nixon sabatoged the peace negotiations.
graham4anything
Feb 2013
#42
Losing may not have been an option (politically) but it was a reality.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2013
#45
No, LBJ would not have won; he knew the political calculus then better than you now.
WinkyDink
Feb 2013
#63
LBJ vs. Nixon head to head, LBJ would have won. Ugly match, but LBJ would have won
graham4anything
Feb 2013
#71
And his explanation is valid as long as you blindly trust your government.
SomethingFishy
Feb 2013
#34
That is an often repeated canard, it's not true. You are conflating Iraq and torture with drones.
stevenleser
Feb 2013
#27
Easy remedy for that, right? Don't move to Yemen and sign up with Al Qaeda. nt
stevenleser
Feb 2013
#33
LOL, you believe that? If Romney did this we would be up in arms. Nice try. n-t
Logical
Feb 2013
#65
no they woudln't, many supported him going into Afghanistan , but didn't support Iraq
JI7
Feb 2013
#72
In Vietnam, if we'd had more liberal Democrats, about 99% of the eventual total KIA.
Egalitarian Thug
Feb 2013
#88
The whole reason we have a Bill of Rights is to protect us from tyranny of the majority.
BlueCheese
Feb 2013
#87