4. Naa, both party's were voting the dead, Greg Palest includes this
in his book. The difference in vote amounted to perhaps a few hundred more in JFK's favor-not close enough to sway the results. That being said, Any one caught Freeping votes ought to do 10 years for it.
Without Johnson to appoint him as Vice President, Hubert Humphrey would've stayed in the Senate, thus depriving Walter Mondale of a Senate seat.
Would Mondale have then run in 1970 when Eugene McCarthy retired?
Without Mondale to pick as VP (he probably wouldn't have gone with a one-term senator), who would Carter have gone for in 1976-Ted Kennedy? Fritz Hollings?
Without instant name recognition for the 1984 elections, would Gary Hart or John Glenn have the 84 nominees? Would Geraldine Ferraro still be in Congress? Would a women have been picked in a later election as a running mate?
9. Illinois was close, Texas, by comparison, was not.
Edited on Mon Apr-19-04 07:48 PM by Josh
Illinois was decided by just over 10,000, which would have been a hell of a lot easier to rig than Texas, which although close, was decided by over 46,000 votes. Not as easy to rig. There is considerable evidence of fraud in Illinois, but less so in Texas. Kennedy did win the popular vote, too, albeit only by 118,000 votes.
Nixon won California by a smaller vote margin than Kennedy won Texas by.
that the popular vote was so close and the electoral vote so different.
Nobody will ever know who stole more votes in Illinois.
But just a small swing in the popular vote would have left Nixon with the popular plurality, but a big loss in the electoral college. Because Kennedy won the big states by small margins, and lost the small states by big margins. That should put paid to the story that the electoral college favors the small states that would be powerless otherwise!!
Typically, when a Dem wins Illinois they win a lot more downstate counties than Kennedy won. That leads me to think Cook County was rigged to some extent. However, you have to bear in mind that electoral fraud is somewhat frequent and that it occurs on both sides in varying degrees around the country.
even though there may have been some shenanigans in chicago for the DEms, there was just as much downstate "tinkering" for the repuglikkkans. besides, Kennedy won by more electoral votes than illinois had, so even without it, he still would have won the white houe.
I remember hearing that Mayor Daley held up the final total until it looked like Kennedy was going to need Illinois to put him over the top. The right-wing has been fanning the flames of this pseudo scandal for over 40 years!
Nixon accused Daley of stealing the election in heavily-Democratic Chicago, and demanded a recount. When Daley countered with the offer of a statewide recount, including the heavily-Republican downstate counties, Nixon dropped his demand and conceded the election.
I have always heard stories about Johnson and Duvale County. Back in those days, Duvale County was ruled by George Parr (the Duke of Duvale County) who was rumored to be responsible for Johnson's first Senate win.
However, as in Illinois, there was republican cheating in other parts of the state that may have balance the scale. Texas politics has always been dirty and the losers usually do not have clean hands in the affair.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.