The Ghost of 1968 Haunts the Democrats
March 6th, 2008 at 02:01am Mark Noonan
Unless one of the Democrats drops out, there is no way for either of them to secure a first ballot nominating majority at the Democratic convention - and without such a first ballot nominee, literally anything is possible because the pledged delegates are only pledged to vote for their candidate on the first ballot; after that, they are free to do what they wish. Naturally, most delegates will cling to their candidate, but if it goes two or three ballots with no winner, then all sorts of pressures and passions will arise.
This is important because the Democratic coalition isn’t exactly a community of shared interests - other than a generalised desire to have themselves in power rather than Republicans, there’s really not too much in common between the constituent parts of the Democratic party. Union members and Hollywood elites? Black evangelicals and white homosexuals? Urban metrosexuals and Catholic hispanics? Yeah, just a bunch of peas in a pod. In reality, there are deep fissures in the Democratic party - papered over with a promise of government swag (in varied forms) for all, but vulnerable if a fight breaks out between the parts.
You make one part of that crazy-quilt mad, and what would make them stick to the party? The loyalty a blue collar steel worker feels towards a performance artist from San Francisco? In the fact that it is a woman vs a black man, we already have two major Democratic constituencies (African-Americans and feminists) at loggerheads - and as Obama and Hillary dodge and weave and try to please enough delegates to secure a nomination, they will run the daily risk of alienating parts of the party while trying to curry favor with other parts of the party. Eventually a nominee will be settled on, but not before a great deal of confusion, anger and resentment is built into the party apparatus. Add into this the various outside pressure groups who will descend upon the convention to shout their desires in front of the television cameras and add to the din of competing special interests. Can you imagine trying to craft a platform in such a bedlam? With no one controlling the daily message, the kook left might actually make it on to national television!
And it was the kook left making it on to television (really, in their television debut) in 1968 which did more than anything else to ensure Nixon was elected President. Never a very popular man, Nixon appeared calm and reasonable and the GOP a party of adults compared to the insane frenzy of the Democrats that year. This year, that very same kook left - artfully placed on the sideilnes since the days of “Sister Boom Boom” at the 1984 Democratic convention - will be without a leash and without a minder…two teams will actually be competing for their support in order to secure the nomination, and that means the left will be prominent, front and center, as it were.
The poison in American politics emanates from the Democratic party - with their bizarre collection of constituencies it is really only a sense of shared hatreds which unifies them for a national campaign…in this year, as in 1968, those hatred may very well be turned internally, as Democrats fight each other for the ragged bones of raw political power. If this happens, then the result will be the same as 1968.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Kook Left
11 Comments
1. Freedom1 | March 6th, 2008 at 2:13 am
“The Ghost of 1968 Haunts the Demoncrats”
Quick! Somebody call the Ghostbusters!! :)
/couldn’t resist!
2. kjstrouble | March 6th, 2008 at 2:27 am
Naw, I say just let them implode.
3. Aaron | March 6th, 2008 at 3:54 am
Markie Markie Markie -
“Unless one of the Democrats drops out, there is no way for either of them to secure a first ballot nominating majority at the Democratic convention”
Absolutely wrong. You are confused (again).
Yes, you need 2025 delegates to get the nomination. If Hillary decides to stay in until the convention, the best projections show that Obama will have secured roughly 1690 pledged delegates, while Clinton will arrive in Denver with about 1520 (that’s with her winning PA by a comfortable margin). So yes, that will mean that the 790 super-delegates will put one or the other over the top - that’s not remotely the same thing as failing to reach a first ballot majority.
It’s really very simple, Mark: there are only two candidates in the race. Thus, it is virtually impossible for one or the other candidate not to have a majority on the first ballot. The only ways either Hillary or Barack don’t reach 2025 on the first ballot would be if large numbers of delegates were to collapse and die on the way to the convention floor, or if the voting were to result in a strict numerical tie.
The only time you have to go to multiple ballots is if there is a third (or 4th, or 5th) candidate involved - and even then it is unlikely.
btw, despite the violence on the streets outside the 1968 Chicago convention, and despite the rancor going on inside, and despite there being 3 candidates, Humphrey easily received the nomination on the first ballot.
In fact, you have to go all the way to 1948 for the last time the Democrats did not select the nominee on the first ballot. For Republicans, multiple ballots last happened at the 1952 convention.
I know you would love to see some kind of ugly convention floor fight that somehow results in Hillary being the nominee. Sorry - dream on.
Of those 790, 207 have declared for Obama, while 242 have declared for Clinton.
4. Aaron | March 6th, 2008 at 3:57 am
Markie Markie Markie -
“Unless one of the Democrats drops out, there is no way for either of them to secure a first ballot nominating majority at the Democratic convention”
Absolutely wrong. You are confused (again).
Yes, you need 2025 delegates to get the nomination. If Hillary decides to stay in until the convention, the best projections show that Obama will have secured roughly 1690 pledged delegates, while Clinton will arrive in Denver with about 1520 (that’s with her winning PA by a comfortable margin). So yes, that will mean that the 790 super-delegates will put one or the other over the top - but that’s not remotely the same thing as failing to reach a first ballot majority.
It’s really very simple, Mark: there are only two candidates in the race. Thus, it is virtually impossible for one or the other candidate not to have a majority on the first ballot. The only ways either Hillary or Barack don’t reach 2025 on the first ballot would be if large numbers of delegates were to collapse and die on the way to the convention floor, or if the voting were to result in a strict numerical tie.
The only time you have to go to multiple ballots is if there is a third (or 4th, or 5th) candidate involved - and even then it is unlikely.
btw, despite the violence on the streets outside the 1968 Chicago convention, and despite the rancor going on inside, and despite there being 3 candidates, Humphrey easily received the nomination on the first ballot.
In fact, you have to go all the way to 1948 for the last time the Democrats did not select the nominee on the first ballot. For Republicans, multiple ballots last happened at the 1952 convention.
I know you would love to see some kind of ugly convention floor fight that somehow results in Hillary being the nominee. Sorry - dream on.
5. plainjane | March 6th, 2008 at 8:40 am
…American politics emanates from the Democratic Party - with their bizarre collection of constituencies ….Mark Noonan
The Democratic Party is the last hope many of these groups have for a voice in “their” country. The Republican Party has turned into some kind of cult; with a “DNA sample required or do not enter” sign on the door. Groups within the Democratic Party have aligned with a particular candidate; African Americans, the youth and college educated for Obama while women and blue collar workers back Clinton. Where will any of these groups go to if their candidate fails to get the nomination; to a third Party where the deck will be stacked against them or maybe to a Party about to be lead by an elderly white male who has just met at the White House to embrace Bush’s economy and war. Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha. I have not been listening to Limbaugh or Hannity lately, is this what they are gleefully playing. When this comes up Repugs need to be reminded Lincoln was nominated on the third ballot during 1860 Republican convention after some sneaky tricks by his supporters, and how did that election turn out?
Your 1968 analogy is not well thought out. 1968 was all about, loss of RFK, Vietnam and a stupid, stupid, stupid Chicago mayor. In fact, the Republicans should be more fearful of a 1968 repeat at their convention as the neocons and religious right try to maintain control of gains they made in the Party Platform vs the more liberal McCain followers who now hold the reins of power in the Party.
6. Piggy | March 6th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
WOW JUST WOW.
You guys are so sad you’re going to dig up Richard Nixon and run him again.
He would though get more votes than McCain
7. Mark Noonan | March 6th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Aaron,
There is a thing called “abstain”…as super delegates try to figure out whom to vote for…then there is also the almost inevitible fight over credentials…who is actually a delegate entitled to vote?
Finally, if you read what I wrote, it says that neither of them will go into the convention with a first ballot nominating majority…which is a clear fact; now, you’re right, with super delegates one of them could secure the nominatoin on the first ballot…but given the dynamics of the situation, it won’t be easy for either of them to do that…and once the first ballot is over, its anyone’s guess what will happen.
8. Just Another Taxpayer | March 6th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
The ghost of 1933 haunts the republicans. It’s the economy dummy. Even the contested dem nomination is over that issue. The Iraqi welfare program is increasingly being framed in terms of our domestic finances.
If you believe Iraq is still an important issue, just ask anyone who is going through forclosure proceedings.
People in this situation rightly ask how money going to any aspect of the Iraqi welfare program is helping them. As do the millions of their countrymen whose financial future is threatened by what is happening to those who are losing their homes.
There is another question people in financial distress here need to have answered: If the Iraqis want us there so badly, then why are we paying to stay?
Lok forward to your responses, if you’ve got the guts.
9. Ricorun | March 6th, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Apart from what JAT “just” said, and apart from whether the Dems are specifically haunted by the ghosts of 1968 or not, they clearly have their hands full of dopplegangers of one sort or another. And as such the question remains whether they will manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory once again. Considering how much they have going for them, that would be quite a feat. But considering how successful they’ve been at it in the past, it wouldn’t surprise me all that much. Still, I’m not prepared to put any serious money down one way or another — much less stake my life on it. It’s only early March. There’s still plenty of time for all kinds of things to happen.
10. Michael | March 6th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
There are two bloody fights on in donkeyland. One is between Obama and Clinton with each one promising to get meaner and nastier. The second is already nasty and that is the behind the scenes fights between factions and camps in the Democrat party, including the DNC and “disenfranchised” states. Expect many overlapping law suits and much blood-letting. And unless the get it all right (unlikely), a fractured party which will be extremely vulnerable for years.
11. phnx | March 6th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Yes the super delegates are going to decide it for one or the other. As emotional as this has been so far, you leftists are kidding yourself if you think that all of your troops will line up behind the democrat nominee. Your party has successfully rested the decision from the people, putting it the hands of party elites. If you don’t think that result will alienate parts of your electorate you are living in some alternate universe.
We are delighted that this leftist soap opera will continue on into the future because:
1. More leftist $$$$ burned uselessly.
2. Hillary and Obama will trash the other, thereby saving McCain from doing the same. So McCain can keep his powder dry for the main event.
3. 7 more weeks of Shrillary, Obama and their attack dogs going at each other will bore the average american, and polarize the dems into waring factions.
4. The Ebony and Ivory soap opera is highly entertaining.