Hey Clinton apologists, do you actually know what the primary process was like back in 1968?

Bread and Circus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 09:59 AM
Original message

Hey Clinton apologists, do you actually know what the primary process was like back in 1968?

There were only 13 primaries and most delegates could pick whomever they wanted. There is no historical equivalent to what is happening now other than Obama is inspirational like Kennedy and Clinton is the establishment candidate like Humphrey. However, in terms of process the primary system back then and the one we have now are entirely difference.

So, is Hillary suggesting we go back to how primaries were held back in 1968. I can't for the life of me make any sense of her statement. However, I can't make much sense of her campaign either other than she tried a modified "Southern Strategy" once her fait accompli on Super Duper Tuesday didn't work.

Clinton apologists indeed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

K Gardner

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 10:00 AM
Response to Original message

1. There is NO historical paralell... exactly the point, thank you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Captain Hilts

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 10:02 AM
Response to Original message

2. A different structure, but the primaries lasted longer over the calender year.

The Humphrey-RFK parallel is an interesting one for the reasons it works and for the reasons it doesn't work.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DerekJ

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 10:03 AM
Response to Original message

3. I just made a post about that in reply to skinner's thread. She only used 1968 as an example of

something catastrophic that can happen.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

suston96

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 10:15 AM
Response to Original message

4. Maybe you don't remember what happened in 1968....

Humphrey did not enter a single state primary but was nominated by the convention.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bread and Circus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #4

8. That's part of the point. The whole primary system was different back then.

He could have won, and some thought he would, without even winning the primaries.

To draw parallels between the current system and then is farcical.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ecdab

(834 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 10:38 AM
Response to Original message

5. It's just political misdirection designed to confuse voters into thinking

there is some sort of a reason for her to continue other than to collect money from them to pay off her debts to Mark Penn and herself.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bigtree

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 10:39 AM
Response to Original message

6. when you find a Clinton 'apologist' let us know

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

chascarrillo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-24-08 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #6

7. Good point. Clinton never apologizes, so why should her supporters?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:29 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.