The American Politics thread

[silentstriker]

He's not going to get nominated. He won't have nearly enough delegates, as we've been saying all along. He's using the delegate system to his advantage, which is not really designed to reflect the will of the electorate, and good for him, but at most it'll get him a speech somewhere. Which will be awesome for the democrats when he gets up and undercuts his own party's platform on Live TV in the middle of the republican convention.

[Ikki]

Manan, I get $500 if it does happen, IIRC.

This is a couple months old and I think Maddow is an idiot, but it explains things decently.

All Delegates Belong to Ron Paul "The Rachel Maddow Show" - YouTube

[Spark]

I'm really quite perplexed as to the Republican field this year. It's universally agreed by esteemed commentators that most of the Repubs' best people are sitting on the sidelines - the Pawlentys and the like. Surely this is their one big shot at glory, to unseat a struggling first-term president?

Or is this a sign of something much bigger, a dehomogenisation and a fracturing of the GOP in the post-neocon years? Certainly the evangelical/hard-right faction is cawing as loudly as it can, very reminiscent of a has-been in its last days of genuine relevancy.

[vic_orthdox]

Surely they're all just lining up for a proper go in 2016. Don't think the broader political system and media allow a couple of cracks at the cherry now.

[Spark]

They are, the question is why. A high-quality candidate which the GOP base is firmly behind would be a big favourite to win the election, even accounting for Obama's immense campaigning skills.

[Fusion]

Originally Posted by Spark

They are, the question is why. A high-quality candidate which the GOP base is firmly behind would be a big favourite to win the election, even accounting for Obama's immense campaigning skills.

Each candidate really gets one shot at winning the Presidency, so you have to pick your moment carefully. If one was serious about running, you had to start laying the groundwork in 2008. Back then, no one could've anticipated that Obama would be this vulnerable come election time. Even with all his vulnerabilities, Obama has a 50/50 shot at winning. That's too high a risk to take for the hot shot candidates you mentioned. They are betting that Obama will win and they will have an open election to contest for in 2016 and hence much better odds.

[smalishah84]

incidentally this "almost only one shot at the presidency" is also what I think is the game. But that is what suprises me about Nixon.

How the hell did he make a comeback after losing to Kennedy in 1960?

and Why didn't Al Gore do such a thing?

[cpr]

The Nixon situation is different, he was vastly respected as VP under Eisenhower, and proven himself a charismatic and competant lawyer during the McCarthy trials - that translated into political reputation.

The Kennedy victory was widely seen as rigged, even at the time, and Nixon walked out with a fine reputation as a respected candidate who only lost due to dirty tactics (especially as the other Kennedy tricks became known, eg turning up the heating for TV debates as Nixon sweated easily, so looked stressed).

Johnson became vastly unpopular due to Vietnam (if it wasnt for America being dragged into that - Johnson felt he had to carry on Kennedys legacy- he'd probably be one of America's great Presidents. He was well respected as a Senator, and his Great Society plan was great on paper). Nixon was offered an easy field to compete against (once Bobby had been shot), and sailed in on his past reputation.


Gore could've done tried same if he hadn't contested Florida IMO - That tarnished his reputation and made him look a bit sour. Should've shut up, taken the defeat like a man and had another go, as he definately had the reputation to get away with it.

[Cevno]

Romney ran last time too.

[Spark]

I think what's meant is that you get one shot as the nominee - no one really gives a **** if lose in primary season.

[Fusion]

^ Yup.

[Spikey]

Originally Posted by cpr

and Nixon walked out with a fine reputation as a respected candidate who only lost due to dirty tactics (especially as the other Kennedy tricks became known, eg turning up the heating for TV debates as Nixon sweated easily, so looked stressed).

let's get one thing clear, this was a brilliant idea

[Fusion]

Originally Posted by cpr

(especially as the other Kennedy tricks became known, eg turning up the heating for TV debates as Nixon sweated easily, so looked stressed).

Hmm, I've never heard this claim before. Everything I've read about that debate states that Nixon was tired and didn't know how to properly apply makeup. Here's an excerpt about that debate from The Museum of Broadcast Communication:

In August, Nixon had seriously injured his knee and spent two weeks in the hospital. By the time of the first debate he was still twenty pounds underweight, his pallor still poor. He arrived at the debate in an ill-fitting shirt, and refused make-up to improve his color and lighten his perpetual "5:00 o'clock shadow." Kennedy, by contrast, had spent early September campaigning in California. He was tan and confident and well-rested. "I had never seen him looking so fit," Nixon later wrote.

I think it was just a matter of Nixon not realizing the power of Television.

[smalishah84]

Originally Posted by cpr

The Nixon situation is different, he was vastly respected as VP under Eisenhower, and proven himself a charismatic and competant lawyer during the McCarthy trials - that translated into political reputation.

The Kennedy victory was widely seen as rigged, even at the time, and Nixon walked out with a fine reputation as a respected candidate who only lost due to dirty tactics (especially as the other Kennedy tricks became known, eg turning up the heating for TV debates as Nixon sweated easily, so looked stressed).

Johnson became vastly unpopular due to Vietnam (if it wasnt for America being dragged into that - Johnson felt he had to carry on Kennedys legacy- he'd probably be one of America's great Presidents. He was well respected as a Senator, and his Great Society plan was great on paper). Nixon was offered an easy field to compete against (once Bobby had been shot), and sailed in on his past reputation.


Gore could've done tried same if he hadn't contested Florida IMO - That tarnished his reputation and made him look a bit sour. Should've shut up, taken the defeat like a man and had another go, as he definately had the reputation to get away with it.

quality post

[vic_orthdox]

Originally Posted by Fusion

I think it was just a matter of Nixon not realizing the power of Television.

Yeah, that's how I've always heard it framed, although the winner always gets to tell the story!

Believe Nixon won the debate via all the radio polls, and Kennedy by those on TV.