Humphrey, McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis.

[Tennessee Gal]

What do they have in common?

Not mentioning Gore because we all know it was stolen from him.

[AtomicKitten]

1. They were better candidates than Hillary?

[cliffordu]

4. Bada Bing!!!!! Nice shot!!!!

:rofl:



:patriot:

[NYCGirl]

5. From what I'm seeing lately, they were far better and more decent people than

Hillary.

[Auntie Bush]

8. They all ate kittens?

[A-Schwarzenegger]

2. Two down, one to go.

[City Lights]

3. LOL! nt

[Hepburn]

6. They are real Democrats and Hillary, McCain and Bush are Repukes?

:shrug:

[goldcanyonaz]

7. Tennessee, check your inbox!

[QC]

9. They all swept the primaries! n/t

[JohnnyLib2]

10. I voted for them.

Sigh.

[anonymous171]

11. They were all white and experienced?

Just a guess

[dchill]

12. Elitists?

[Mz Pip]

13. Not much really

except that they lost.

Humphrey never won a primary but was given the nomination in the smoke filled rooms of Chicago. He was running as a Democrat in a war that was escalated by the Democrats.

McGovern might have had a better shot if the powers that were in the Democratic Party turned their back on him when he got the nomination. The money dried up and he was left to twist in the wind. Besides Nixon had that "Secret plan" to end the war that people bought into.

Mondale ran against a popular president. THere was also a 3rd party candidate, John Anderson, who got 5% of the vote.

Dukakis followed a popular President. His biggest blunder was during the debates where he answered a question about how he would feel if his wife were raped. He was so academic that it came off uncaring. Being a Massachusetts liberal didn't help him much either.

[Tennessee Gal]

14. Nobody wins.

[donheld]

18. Nobody wins. with your whining.

[Tennessee Gal]

19. Whining?

You don't like to spend much time thinking.

[Spider Jerusalem]

15. They actually won the nomination?

[Warren DeMontague]

16. They were or are bipedal, carbon-based life forms on the planet Earth?

Okay, why don't you tell us. Really.

[Tennessee Gal]

17. Sheesh.

Evidence of Democrats nominating candidates with no chance of winning.

Wake up!

I admit that Bobby would have been nominated over Humphrey, but think about this. Please!

[Hawkeye-X]

21. Except you keep backing a 2nd-rate never-will

stupid person that doesn't think like a Democrat, but a Republican.

Whatever.

:eyes:

Hawkeye-X

[Tennessee Gal]

23. Refuse to learn from history at your own peril.

I supported Edwards.

[tritsofme]

22. HHH had no chance of winning?

He lost in one of our nation's closest elections, despite a big third party performance that split away from the New Deal coalition.

[grantcart]

26. and so your arguing that we should nominate the person who has been unable to convince

anybody to support her in the last 3 months who wasn't already supporting her?

You do realize that exactly 1 year ago her polling was 37% and one year later it is now 40%?

Has there ever been anyone with more of an advantage in name recognition, contacts, money, SD endorsements who has been able to do anything with it?

In one year she has been absolutely unable to grab any share away from the other 5 candidates who dropped out. None.

And you are arguing that we should chose this remarkable example of flatlining as some kind of example of electoral prowress?


How clever of you.

[Kool Kitty]

38. So what you are saying that any Democrat that

gets the nomination can't win? Is that your point?

[quakerboy]

40. Which is why we are so

desperate to avoid Hillary. We don't want to go down the losing path again.

As far as the right, and an unfortunately large percent of the independents are concerned, she is the the Borg Queen, Cinderellas evil step mother, Darth Vader, and Morgoth all rolled into one package. And her performance thus far this primary has managed to convince a fair number of democrats of the same thing. From a purely tactical perspective, I would rather be running DK and his alien sighting than what they would have thrown at us if we had been so blind as to nominate her. Fortunately that is a non issue.

[woolldog]

20. they were technocrats with lots of experience....

like Hillary Clinton? :shrug:

[Tennessee Gal]

24. You refuse to look at history.

[thewiseguy]

25. And Hillary has the better chance of winning in GE? Says who?

You think the Obama supporters are going to come around and vote for her? NO

[woolldog]

27. they were white males?

:shrug: I dunno. Help me out here...

[alcibiades_mystery]

28. Make your fucking historical argument or get off the pot

You really are something. You sit here accusing people of refusing to think and refusing to look at history, whatever either of those mean. Yet you refuse yourself to provide a worked out, evidence-based argument for your silly claim. Fucking make the argument already. Show us with some detailed evidence what these people have in common, and how what they have in common is in the least bit relevant to our current situation. Go ahead and fucking do it. You can't very well accuse others of not thinking when you spout meaningless cliches while pretending to know something (look at history-squawk-look at history-squawk--etc..). Provide us some history to look at, you fucking "historian." And make sure your methodology is sound, because there might just be some professional historians on the board who will take you up on your challenge, "historian."

[blonndee]

30. BAM!

:thumbsup:

[woolldog]

31. None of them had blonde hair?

:shrug:

[woolldog]

34. is there a professor of classics in the house?

:hi:

[Tennessee Gal]

35. You are apparently to lazy to look it up for yourself.

They have a lot in common.

They are Democrats who won the nomination and lost overwhelmingly in the GE.

Is history about to be repeated?

[alcibiades_mystery]

36. That's your argument?

Wow. That's insightful.

Your post is utter fail. At least fill one page of an exam bluebook if you want even partial credit.

Pathetic.

[EFerrari]

33. What an incredibly ignorant thing to say.

As if history is on two tablets somewhere, under ten headlines.

I hope you aren't homeschooling children, and if you are, I don't WANT to know.

[EFerrari]

29. They weren't bigots?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

32. Alvin, Simon, Theodore.

:shrug:

[Beacool]

37. They all lost?

You can add Obama to that equation if he ends up being the nominee.

[Gore1FL]

39. Good thing we are breaking the trend by nominating Obama