Four decades ago, Richard Nixon lived out the fantasy many liberals harbor about Donald Trump, stepping down in the face of possible impeachment over a slow-moving scandal long before his term was up. Before that happened, however, Nixon was reelected by a resounding margin, in large part because progressives made strategic errors that Democrats today appear hellbent on repeating.

In 1968, as in 2016, Democrats narrowly lost the White House after nominating a relatively moderate, establishment candidate instead of a more liberal alternative who had inspired a raging enthusiasm among younger voters.

Democrats spent much of the next four years arguing about what direction the party should take. White working-class voters—traditionally a Democratic bloc—were sluicing away, and progressives, convinced the party needed to change both its policy direction and its coalition of supporters, demanded a new approach: a “loose peace coalition” of minorities, young voters and educated white Democrats, as strategist Fred Dutton wrote in his 1971 book, Changing Sources of Power. One year later, the party’s presidential nominee, the ultra-liberal Senator George McGovern of South Dakota, went on to lose 49 states in one of the most lopsided victories in American history.

Politics today are much different than they were then, as is the shape of the American electorate. But there are parallels that Democrats should bear in mind as they nurse their hopes of driving Trump from the Oval Office. Trump is a culture warrior, and progressives today are perfectly willing to engage that sideshow—just as they did 45 years ago with Nixon.

Look no further than the recent controversy over NFL players’ protests over police violence and racism, which Trump has successfully portrayed for most voters as an insult to men and women in uniform, the American flag, mom and apple pie.

“If the Democrats become the party of those in favor of kneeling rather than standing for the national anthem,” says historian Jeffrey Bloodworth, author of Losing the Center: A History of American Liberalism, 1968-1992, “that would be a full McGovern.”

Click to expand...

In 1968, as in 2016, Democrats narrowly lost the White House after nominating a relatively moderate, establishment candidate instead of a more liberal alternative who had inspired a raging enthusiasm among younger voters. 

Click to expand...

VendettaRed07 said:

Pretending like political rules from the 70s-90s apply now will give us McGovern

Click to expand...

Slayven said:

The Breitbert expose form last week shines new light on articles like this.

Click to expand...

RinsFury said:

Fuck moving one inch to the right just because white supremacists voted one of their own into power. The problems that should be tackled are gerrymandering and voter suppression, as well as uniting the base behind a strong candidate that gets the youth out to the voting booths.

Click to expand...

Inuhanyou said:

Much more at the link.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/10/09/democrats-mcgovern-1972-trump-nixon-2020-215687

I'm sorry, what? I'm not even talking about the final "point" the article makes, that's just the low hanging fruit that any normal rational person should laugh at and scorn.

This is just my personal opinion and i recognize that there may be many who don't agree, but what partially allowed Trump to win despite his racism and bigotry and historically bad numbers was the fact that the void for a viable solution to people's pain was not met by anyone in establishment circles , and that created a vacuum that was filled with right wing populism that allowed Trump to exploit and fan the flames of the hatred that already lurked beneath the surface on the right.

To destroy that discontent, you need an unapologetic left wing actor who, while caring about social justice, actually gives a shit about what they are saying and pushes for policies people on every side of the spectrum can vouch for, and have them sound authentic about it. Its not too out of bounds considering how much the dems try to "appeal to the moderate center" by going to the right all the time.

How about, instead of compromising everything you claim to care about at your core in an attempt to "appeal to the center". a non existent segment of America....simply speak to common appeals of the common classes while at the same time promoting an ethical social and economic platform. That would unite far more people under a party's banner.

Click to expand...

In 1968, as in 2016, Democrats narrowly lost the White House after nominating a relatively moderate, establishment candidate instead of a more liberal alternative who had inspired a raging enthusiasm among younger voters.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

RinsFury said:

Fuck moving one inch to the right just because white supremacists voted one of their own into power. The problems that should be tackled are gerrymandering and voter suppression, as well as uniting the base behind a strong candidate that gets the youth out to the voting booths.

Click to expand...