Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Joe BidenCongratulations to our presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden!
 

trof

(54,256 posts)
Fri Feb 7, 2020, 07:53 PM Feb 2020

I'll just leave this here...

We need a nomination process that leads to plausible presidents
- George F. Will

In 1964, an optimistic theory was slain, as such theories often are, by reality. Bernie Sanders’s supporters should take note. So should all who are interested in rethinking how the parties choose presidential nominees.

The “conservatives in the woodwork” theory was: Millions of conservatives, bored by centrist presidential candidates, skipped elections but would pour out of the woodwork and into polling places if offered “a choice, not an echo.” So, conservative Republicans achieved the nomination of Barry Goldwater, who then lost 44 states, partly because those swarms of nonvoting conservatives were mostly fictitious. A conservative majority had to be patiently made, which took 16 years.

Goldwater understood that after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, a distraught nation would not choose to have a third president in 14 months. But he also thought that his candidacy could make his party markedly more conservative. If Sanders has a “socialists in the woodwork” theory, he is daft. But some Sanders supporters might think a second Donald Trump term is an acceptable price to pay for a Sanders nomination that moves his party as dramatically leftward as Goldwater’s nomination moved his party rightward.

The nation, however, needs a nominating process that minimizes the probability of kamikaze candidacies and maximizes the probability of selecting plausible presidents. Hence it needs a retreat from the populist idea that the voice of the people is easy to ascertain and should be translated, unmediated and unrefined, directly into nominee selection. Populism has been embraced by both parties since 1968, when Hubert Humphrey won the Democrats’ nomination without entering any primaries. (Although a switch of about 300,000 November votes spread over four states would have made him president.)

The rest: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-need-a-nomination-process-that-leads-to-plausible-presidents/2020/02/06/8e9c0286-4917-11ea-9164-d3154ad8a5cd_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most
If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I'll just leave this here... (Original Post) trof Feb 2020 OP
So George Will is for "mediating" the voice of the people in selecting candidates? bluewater Feb 2020 #1
 

bluewater

(5,376 posts)
1. So George Will is for "mediating" the voice of the people in selecting candidates?
Fri Feb 7, 2020, 07:58 PM
Feb 2020

Hoo boy.

Maybe we can get our Corporate Overlords or Benevolent Billionaires to "mediate" our nominee selection for us, hmmm?



Would this be considered right wing material coming from George Will?

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Democratic Primaries»I'll just leave this here...