POLITICAL PARTIES

1. ARE UNIVERSAL
(EVERY OCCUPIED PLANET IN
OUR SOLAR SYSTEM HAS
THEM)
2. WERE OPPOSED BY
FOUNDERS
3. WERE FOUNDED BY
FOUNDERS
Thomas Jefferson started the first
political party of the
JEFFERSONIAN.
SCHOLARLY BIAS IN FAVOR OF
PARTIES>GROUPS
PARTIES REPRESENT BROAD
COALITIONS OF GROUPS
 THUS, A GREATER % OF THE
POPULATION IS
REPRESENTED/SERVED

POLITICAL PARTIES IN THE US=3

PARTS
1. PARTY ELECTORATE
(CITIZENS)
2. PARTY IN GOVERNMENT
(PIGS)
3. PARTY ORGANIZATION/PARTY
BUREAUCRACY

THE PARTY IN THE ELECTORATE

CAN BE STUDIED AT THE MICRO
LEVEL (INDIVIDUALS)
 OR MACRO LEVEL
(GROUPS/SOCIETY)
MICRO LEVEL PARTISANSHIP
BEST PREDICTORS OF PARTY ID
(REPUBLICAN)
1. INCOME- MORE MONEY
REPUBLICAN
MACRO-LEVEL PARTISANSHIP
SUNDQUIST 1961:
EVERY 30 YEARS, STARTING IN
THE 1830S, WE HAVE
A REALIGNMENT
REALIGNMENT=A SUDDEN,
LASTING CHANGE IN
MAJORITY PARTY STATUS: LASTS
ABOUT 30 YRS (?)
 EVERY 30 YEARS, A CRITICAL
ISSUE DIVIDES THE MAJORITY
PARTY
FORMER MAJORITY PARTY
SUPPORTERS VOTE FOR THE
OTHER PARTY AND NEVER GO
HOME
A CRITICAL ELECTION IS A
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
WHERE THE #1 ISSUE IS THE
CRITICAL ISSUE
AND THE RESULT IS A
REALIGNMENT
PROBLEM WITH THE THEORY
WE HAVE NOT HAD A
REALIGNMENT EVERY 30 YEARS
 TO EXPLAIN WHY NO
REALIGNMENT OCCURED IN THE
1960S:
A DEALIGNMENT OCCURRED!:
1966=HUGE INCREASE IN THE %
OF AMERICANS WHO IDENTIFIED
THEMSELVES AS INDEPENDENTS
HOWEVER…THERE IS AN
‘ALTERNATIVE’ HYPOTHESIS…

EVERY 72 YEARS WE HAVE A

“TRIGGERING EVENT”
WHICH CAUSES A POLITICAL
REALIGNMENT
2 TO 3 YEARS LATER
STARTING IN 1786:
 TRIGGERING INCIDENT: DEBT
CRISIS

CRITICAL ISSUE IN 1787-1788:

WHETHER TO ADOPT NEW
CONSTITUTION
CONSTITUTION IS ADOPTED ONCE
ANTI-FEDS ARE APPEASED
(REMEMBER?)
1788-1860: DEMOCRATS & THEIR
anti-federalist ancestors
DOMINATE
CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENCY
(AFTER WASHINGTON LEAVES
OFFICE)
 THEN IN 1857: DRED SCOTT
DECISION=TRIGGERING INCIDENT
CRITICAL ISSUE: SLAVERY IN THE
LA TERRITORY
1860: DEMOCRATIC PARTY
NOMINATES 3 CANDIDATES
LINCOLN WINS WITH 38% OF
POPULAR VOTE

1860-1932: REPUBLICANS
DOMINATE
ONLY 2 DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTS
FOR 72 YEARS!

1929: TRIGGERING
INCIDENT=STOCK MARKET CRASH
 (CAUSE: DE-REGULATION OF
FINANCIAL
SERVICES/STOCKS/ETC…)
1932 ELECTION: CRITICAL ISSUE:
GREAT DEPRESSION
FDR WINS, BUT 1932-2004
PERIOD=
UNPRECEDENTED SPLIT PARTY
CONTROL OF US GOVERNMENT

2004 ELECTION=A REALIGNING

ELECTION?
WHICH WAY???
2ND LEG OF POLITICAL PARTIES
ELECTED AND APPOINTED
OFFICIALS
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
 MAJORITY PARTY STATUS
DETERMINES…
1. ALL LEADERSHIP POSITIONS
2. ALL COMMITTEE CHAIRS
3. A MAJORITY OF SEATS ON ALL
COMMITTEES, AND
SUBCOMMITTEES

PROBLEM=HOLDING A MAJORITY
OF SEATS DOES NOT EQUAL
HOLDING A MAJORITY OF VOTES…
CHAFEE=R RI=VOTED WITH DEMS
ABOUT 80%
CONN=J.LIEBERMAN=VOTES WITH
REP=80% (D)
 20TH CENTURY 3 GROUPS
1. LIBERAL, NON-SOUTHERN
DEMS
(SWEPT INTO OFFICE WITH
FDR)
2. CONSERVATIVE, SOUTHERN
DEMS
(SWEPT INTO OFFICE WITH
JACKSON)
3. REPUBLICANS
(SWEPT INTO OFFICE WITH
LINCOLN)
THE UK:
A RESPONSIBLE PARTY SYSTEM
1. PARTIES DIFFER ON ALMOST
EVERY ISSUE
 2. PARTIES CAN ENFORCE VOTES
IN THE LEGISLATURE OR
ELSE!
3. PARTIES CAN ENACT THEIR
PLATFORMS AND KEEP THEIR
PROMISES
HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT
ALWAYS A GOOD THING…
LIKE POLL TAX RIOTS OF 1990 IN
LONDON
THE MARGRET THATCHER
EXAMPLE
BECAUSE THE BRITS HAVE NO
CHECKS AND BALANCES
(AND NO CONSTITUTION)
THERE WAS NO WAY TO STOP THE
POLL TAX FROM PASSING
IN OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT,
THE EXECUTIVE CANNOT DO
SOMETHING LIKE THIS!
Signing statement (United States)

A signing statement is a written

pronouncement issued by the
President of the United States
upon the signing of a bill into law.
There is an ongoing controversy
concerning the (UNPRECEDENTED)
extensive use of signing
statements (OVER 1K) by
President George W. Bush to
modify the meaning of laws.

THE THIRD LEG OF AMERICAN

POLITICAL PARTIES
WE WILL BEGIN BY COVERING THE
PARTY ORGANIZATION
THE RISE AND FALL OF POLITICAL
PARTY MACHINES
-----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
THE INVENTION OF PRIMARY
ELECTIONS
HOW THEY DIFFER FROM WHAT
CAME BEFORE (CAUCUS
ELECTIONS).
THE PARTY ORGANIZATION
THE WEAKEST LINK IN THE CHAIN
TODAY
1854 TO 1920S: THE RISE AND
FALL OF POLITICAL PARTY
MACHINES
 RAPID INDUSTRIALIZATION AND
URBANIZATION AND IMMIGRATION
HELPED POLITICAL PARTIES TO
HOLD ONTO POWER FOR
A VERY LONG TIME IN LARGE
NORTHEASTERN CITIES AND A
FEW STATES
THEY (THE PARTIES) CONTROLLED
THE ELECTION PROCESS
BECAUSE THERE WAS NO:
1. SECRET BALLOT
2. VOTER REGISTRATION LAWS
3. CITIZENSHIP REQUIREMENTS
TO VOTE
4. PROHIBITION ON WHO THE
GOVERNMENT CAN HIRE/FIRE
 (OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
SPOILS SYSTEM)
-----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
----
THE BEGINNING OF THE END: 1900
SERIES OF “MUCKRAKING
NEWSPAPER STORIES”
THE POPULIST AND PROGRESSIVE
MOVEMENT
(WHICH WAS A BACKLASH
AGAINST THE POLITICS OF THE
INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION)
AND IMMORTALIZED IN THE
NOVEL AND MOVIE THE WIZARD
OF OZ…SILVER STANDARD NOT
THE GOLD STANDARD
 THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD WAS
THE GOLD STANDARD
THE WIZARD WAS PRESIDENT
MCKINLEY
THE SCARECROW WAS THE
INTELLIGENZIA
THE TIN MAN WAS INDUSTRY
THE COWARDLY LION WAS THE
MILITARY
DOROTHY WAS THE PUBLIC
HER MAGIC SLIPPERS WERE
SILVER IN THE BOOK (THE SILVER
STD)…
-----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
---------------------------------
AGRICULTURAL DISCONTENT & the
THE POPULIST MOVEMENT
The Populist movement began in
the late 19th century, and its
roots lay in the discontent of
farmers Farming life on the Great
Plains was thus a lonely
existenceTo combat their isolation
 farmers began to organize into
social groups.
In the United States, the Progressive
Era was a period of reform which
lasted from the 1890s to the 1920s.[1]
Progressives strongly opposed waste
and corruption, seeking change in
regard to worker's rights and
protection of the ordinary citizen in
general. Initially the movement was
successful at local level, and then it
progressed to state and gradually
national.[2] The reformers (and their
opponents) were predominantly
members of the middle class. Most
were well educated white Protestants
who lived in the cities. Catholics, Jews
and African Americans had their own
versions of the Progressive Movement,
led by the likes of George Cardinal
Mundelein and Booker T. Washington.
The Progressives pushed for
social justice, general equality
and public safety, but there were
 contradictions within the
movement, especially regarding
race.[1]
Almost all major politicians
declared their adherence to some
progressive measures. In politics
the most prominent national
figures were the Republican
politicians Theodore Roosevelt
and Robert LaFollette, Sr. and
Democratic politicians William
Jennings Bryan and Woodrow
Wilson.[3]
[Reform
Significant changes achieved at
the national levels included
Prohibition with the Eighteenth
Amendment and women's
suffrage through to the
Nineteenth Amendment to the
U.S. Constitution as well as the
income tax with the Sixteenth
Amendment and direct election of
 Senators with the Seventeenth
Amendment.

Muckrakers were journalists who

exposed waste, corruption, and
scandal in the highly influential
new medium of national
magazines, such as McClure's.
Progressives shared a common
belief in the ability of science,
technology and disinterested
expertise to identify all problems
and come up with the one best
solution. [4]
Progressives moved to enable the
citizenry to rule more directly and
circumvent political bosses;
California, Wisconsin, and Oregon
took the lead.[5] California
governor Hiram Johnson
established the initiative,
referendum, and recall, viewing
them as good influences for
citizen participation against the
 historic influence of large
corporations on state assembly.[6]
About 16 states began using
primary elections. Many cities set
up municipal reference bureaus to
study the budgets and
administrative structures of local
governments. In Illinois, Governor
Frank Lowden undertook a major
reorganization of state
government.[7] In Wisconsin, the
stronghold of Robert LaFollette,
the Wisconsin Idea, inspired by
Jack Mihoff, used the state
university as the source of ideas
and expertise.[8]

IN SUM PROGRESSIVE/POPULIST
REFORMS INCLUDE, BUT NOT
LIMITED TO:
THE 16TH, 17TH, 18TH AND 19TH AMENDMENTS

NON-PARTISAN ELECTIONS
 CIVIL SERVICE REFORM LAWS
PROTECTING GOVERNMENT
WORKERS
(REPLACEMENT OF THE SPOILS
SYSTEM WITH THE MERIT SYSTEM)
THE SECRET BALLOT
VOTER REGISTRATION LAWS
INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
ELECTIONS
AND ULTIMATELY…

PRIMARY ELECTIONS!
IN A PRIMARY ELECTION, CITIZENS
DIRECTLY VOTE ON WHO EACH
PARTY SHOULD NOMINATE FOR
STATE AND FEDERAL OFFICE IN
EACH PARTY’S PRIMARY
ELECTION…
IN TEXAS: IF YOUR PARTY GOT AT
LEAST 20% OF THE POPULAR
VOTE FOR GOVERNOR IN THE LAST
ELECTION, YOU MUST NOMINATE
YOUR PARTY’S CANDIDATES IN
THE STATE PRIMARY ELECTION,
HELD IN MARCH OF EVEN
NUMBERED YEARS

WHAT THIS CHANGED:

PRIOR TO PRIMARIES, THE PARTY
ORGANIZATION PICKED THE
PARTY NOMINEE FOR OFFICE
AFTER PRIMARIES, THE PARTY IN
THE ELECTORATE PICKED THE
PARTY NOMINEE…
MANY TIMES THE WINNER OF THE
PRIMARY ELECTION WAS NOT THE
PERSON THE PARTY LEADERS
WOULD HAVE CHOSEN…
IN TEXAS YOU MUST RECEIVE A
MAJORITY OF THE PRIMARY VOTE
TO BE THE PARTY’S NOMINEE,
OTHERWISE THERE IS A RUNOFF

THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

PROCESS
FROM THE BEGINNING TO 1832:
CONGRESSIONAL CAUCUS WOULD
CHOSE EACH PARTY’S RESPECTIVE
PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE
STARTING IN 1832: ANDREW
JACKSON CHANGES THE PROCESS
THE DEMOCRATS USE A NATIONAL
PARTY CONVENTION
MADE UP OF DELEGATES FROM
THE STATES
THESE DELEGATES WERE CHOSEN
AT STATE CONVENTIONS
MOST DELEGATES WERE
UNCOMMITTED, BUT WERE IN
REALITY
A TOOL OF STATE PARTY
LEADERS!

UP THROUGH 1968 MOST OF THE

NATIONAL CONVENTION
DELEGATES WERE CHOSEN IN THE
MANNER DESCRIBED ABOVE…
BUT THIS STARTED TO CHANGE IN
1912…

DIRECT PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES

THIS IS HOW DIRECT PRIMARIES
WORK FOR PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTIONS
DELEGATES ARE CHOSEN IN THE
FOLLOWING MANNER:
IF CANDIDATE A RECEIVES 40% OF
THE VOTE IN THE PRIMARY, HE
GETS 40% OF THE DELEGATES
WHO WILL BE COMMITTED TO
VOTE FOR HIM AT THE NATIONAL
CONVENTION
IF CANDIDATE B GETS 30% OF THE
VOTE, HE GETS 30% OF THE
DELEGATES
IF CANDIDATE C GETS 10% GUESS
HOW MANY HE GETS
VOTE %=DELEGATE %
IN 1912 ABOUT 12 STATES HOLD
DIRECT PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY
ELECTIONS
THE 1912 ELECTION
WILLIAM HOWARD TAFT
OUR LARGEST PRESIDENT AT 350
LBS
TAFT HAD BEEN HAND-PICKED TO
REPLACE TR, WHO HAD
ANNOUNCED AFTER HIS ELECTION
IN 1904
THAT HE WOULD NOT RUN IN 1908
 HE SAID IT WAS THE BIGGEST
MISTAKE OF HIS LIFE, AND IT
WAS…
TAFT WAS MUCH MORE
CONSERVATIVE THAN TR
WITH MANY PROGRESSIVE
REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS AND
STATE LEGISLATURES,
THE PARTY SPLIT UNDER TAFT
(AS DID HIS SHORTS….SORRY)

TAFT WAS SO UNPOPULAR WITH

REPUBLICAN “INSURGENTS” THAT
THEY WANTED TO DO THE
UNTHINKABLE
AND CHALLENGE HIM FOR HIS
OWN PARTY’S NOMINATION FOR A
2ND TERM
PROGRESSIVES BACKED
WISCONSIN GOVERNOR ROBERT
M. LAFOLLETTE SR
BUT AFTER HE COLLAPSED
DURING A SPEECH, HIS HEALTH
BECAME AN ISSUE (HE’D LIVE
UNTIL 1925)
 SO, THE PROGRESSIVES TURNED
TO TR INSTEAD
1912 WAS THE FIRST YEAR THERE
WOULD BE DIRECT PRESIDENTIAL
PRIMARIES
WHERE NATIONAL CONVENTION
DELEGATES WOULD BE PICKED
AS “COMMITTED” DELEGATES
WHO HAD TO VOTE FOR A
SPECIFIC CANDIDATE
RATHER THAN JUST WHOEVER THE
STATE PARTY BOSSES WANTED
THIS IS THE FIRST TIME DIRECT
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES ARE
USED IN A PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION
Altogether, TR won 284
delegates in the primaries to
125 for Taft and 36 for
LaFollette.
Including delegates chosen in
party conventions,
Taft had a 571-439 margin,
thanks to the fact most states
 were not using primary
elections yet
At least for the Presidential
elections, placing Taft over the
540 needed for nomination.
[NYT 5/29/1912]i
TR WON 8 PRIMARIES, TAFT 3,
LA FOLLETTE 2
POPULAR VOTE:
TR=1.183,238 (51.14%)
TAFT=800,411 (34.59%)
La Follette =327,357 (14.15%)

THE PRIMARY SEASON WAS

MUCH SHORTER THAN TODAY
(MARCH 19 TO JUNE 4TH)
AS HE THREATENED TO DO
EARLY ON IN THE PRIMARIES,
TR RAN A 3RD PARTY CAMPAIGN
ON OCTOBER 14TH SOMEONE
SHOT HIM WHILE MAKING A
SPEECH, IT KNOCKED HIM
DOWN
HE GOT UP, FINISHED THE
SPEECH, AND WAS IN THE
 HOSPITAL 8 DAYS FOR
‘OBSERVATION”
BEFORE WJ BRYAN IN 1896,
NOBODY CAMPAIGNED FOR
PRESIDENT
KEEPING TR OFF THE
CAMPAIGN TRAIL THE LAST
COUPLE WEEKS MAY OR MAY
NOT HAVE COST HIM THE
ELECTION

UNTIL 1972
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES WERE A
CURIOSITY
TRUMAN’S POOR SHOWING IN THE
1952 NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY
MIGHT HAVE CONVINCED HIM TO
GET OUT OF TOWN (DOUBTFUL)
JFK RAN WELL IN 1960 PRIMARIES
TO CONVERT DEMOCRATIC
OFFICIALS TO HIS CAMPAIGN

YOU DID NOT HAVE TO ENTER AND

RUN IN DIRECT PRESIDENTIAL
PRIMARIES TO BE NOMINATED
QUITE FREQUENTLY, NATIONAL
CONVENTIONS WERE SPLIT
EVERY ROLL CALL OF THE STATES
= 1 BALLOT
MOST CONVENTIONS DID NOT
NOMINATE A CANDIDATE UNTIL A
2ND, 3RD, 4TH BALLOT AT LEAST!
THE 1924 DEMOCRATIC
CONVENTION NOMINATED JOHN
W. DAVIS ON THE 103RD BALLOT!
 BUT, THE NATIONAL PARTY
CONVENTION WAS THE “DECISION
CENTER” UNTIL 1972
IN 1972 FOR THE FIRST TIME,
MOST OF THE NATIONAL
CONVENTION DELEGATES FOR THE
DEMS (AND EVENTUALLY, THE
REPUBLICANS AS WELL) WOULD
BE CHOSEN THROUGH DIRECT
PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES.
WHY?

THE 1968 PRESIDENTIAL

ELECTION: CHAOS THEORY…
 THERE WERE ONLY 13 DIRECT
(PLUS 4 “PREFERENCE)
PRIMARIES IN THE 1968 ELECTION
THE VAST MAJORITY OF
DELEGATES FOR BOTH PARTIES
WOULD BE CHOSEN BY OR
THROUGH
CAUCUSES (LAST TIME FOR THE
DEMS)…

1968 ANALYSIS BEGINNING WITH

THE REPUBLICANS:
THE THRILLA IN VANILLA…

GOP: 1ST=NIXON BUT GEORGE

ROMNEY (GOV. MICH) IS A CLOSE
2ND
THEN HE MADE AN UNFORTUNATE
COMMENT ON WHY HE
SUPPORTED THE VIETNAM WAR IN
1965 BUT
WAS BEGINNING TO OPPOSE IT IN
1967. HE SAID IN AN INTERVIEW
THAT HE HAD BEEN
“BRAINWASHED” BY
THE GENERALS AND THE
DIPLOMATS THERE WHO DID A
“VERY THOROUGH JOB”

Gallup Poll Results for George

Romney (1967-68)
SO, AS IT TURNS OUT, NIXON’S
THE ONE…
NIXON’S NOMINATION MARKED A
REMARKABLE COMEBACK
 BUT, HE DID NOT GET THE
NOMINATION UNCONTESTED
1968 REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL
CANDIDATES

THEIR NAMES WERE PLACED IN

NOMINATION, NOT ALL ACTIVELY
CAMPAIGNED FOR THIS HONOR

IT LOOKED LIKE 1968 WOULD BE

CLOSE…
PRINCETON, N. J., Feb. 24--Richard
M. Nixon has drawn even with
President Johnson in the latest
test of election strength,
according to the Gallup Poll
THE DEMOCRATS: THERE WILL BE
BLOOD…
DEMOCRATIC FRONTRUNNER
GOING INTO 1968: PRESIDENT
LYNDON JOHNSON
BUT HE HAD A PROBLEM, HE WAS
AT BEST THE 2ND MOST POPULAR
PERSON IN THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY

WHO WAS 1ST?

RFK AT THE 1964 DEMOCRATIC
CONVENTION
RFK RESIGNS AS ATTORNEY
GENERAL TO RUN FOR US
SENATOR FROM NY IN EARLY 1964
HE WINS IN 1964 BY A MARGIN OF
VICTORY SMALLER THAN LBJ’S
POPULAR VOTE MARGIN IN NY
AND ONLY AFTER EXTENSIVE
CAMPAIGNING BY LBJ ON RFK’S
BEHALF
MEANING: RFK OWED HIS SEAT TO
LBJ’S LANDSLIDE…
RFK WANTED TO BE THE VP
CANDIDATE IN 1964 BUT LBJ SHUT
HIM OUT…

THERE WAS A LONG HISTORY OF

ANIMOSITY BETWEEN THE 2 OF
THEM
THE STORY IS THAT RFK MEETS
WITH LBJ IN 1967 AND THREATENS
TO CHALLENGE LBJ FOR THE
 DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION IN
1968, SPLITTING THE PARTY IN 2
AND THROWING THE ELECTION TO
NIXON…
LBJ CALLS HIS BLUFF, AND RFK
ANNOUNCES HE WILL NOT RUN
FOR PRESIDENT IN 1968
SO, RFK IS OUT, EUGENE
MCCARTHY IS IN! (NOV 30TH 1968
JUST SO YOU KNOW)

THE WORLD RESPONDS: GENE

WHO?
CHRISTMAS 1967: LBJ PRESSURES
WESTMORLAND TO ANNOUNCE
THE WAR IS OVER IN VIETNAM
 SENATOR ROBERT F. KENNEDY
(RFK)
INSISTS HE WILL NOT CHALLENGE
LBJ IN 1968 (1/30/68)

1/31/68: TET OFFENSIVE BEGINS

IN VIETNAM
70K COMMUNIST GUERELLAS
(INSURGENTS) ATTACK US &
SOUTH VIETNAMESE EVERYWHERE
BUT, WASN’T THE WAR OVER?
2/2/68 NIXON ANNOUNCES HIS
CANDIDACY FOR PRESIDENT
(THIS WILL NOT BE MY FINAL
PRESS CONFERENCE)
2/6/68 “LOOK” MAGAZINE
ARTICLE ASKS MCCARTHY
 WHAT ABOUT BOB? 2/27/68:
CRONKITE CRITICIZES VIETNAM
WAR
2/28/68: WESTMORLAND ASKS
FOR 206,000 MORE TROOPS
BE SENT TO VIETNAM (THEY
WON’T BE…)
3/2/68 RFK MEETS AT HICKORY
HILL (HOME) TO CONTEMPLATE
ENTERING 1968 ELECTION
3/9/68: BEATLES WIN GRAMMY
ALBUM OF THE YEAR FOR THIS
ALBUM
3/10/68: RFK FLIES OUT TO
CALIFORNIA TO SHOW
SUPPORT FOR FARM WORKERS
STRIKE
 3/12/68 NEW HAMPSHIRE
PRIMARY RESULTS
1968 - Lyndon Johnson* (49.6%)
Eugene McCarthy (41.4%) Richard
M. Nixon (4.6%)
1968 - RICHARD M. NIXON*
(77.6%) NELSON ROCKEFELLER
(10.8%) EUGENE MCCARTHY
(5.3%) LYNDON JOHNSON (1.7%)
GEORGE ROMNEY (1.7%)
A POST-ELECTION SURVEY WOULD
FIND 3 OUT OF 5 MCCARTHY
VOTERS THOUGHT MCCARTHY
WOULD
KICK ASS IN VIETNAM…
(EXPLAINED IN CLASS)
3/16/68 RFK ANNOUNCES HE’S IN
(MY LAI MASSACRE OCCURS 500
VILLAGERS MURDERED BY US
TROOPS)
MARCH 26 -- RICHARD M. NIXON
HAS A SLIM 41-TO-39 PER CENT
LEAD OVER PRESIDENT JOHNSON
IN THE LATEST GALLUP POLL
"TRIAL HEAT," CONDUCTED
FOLLOWING THE NEW HAMPSHIRE
PRIMARY. FAR BEHIND MR. NIXON
AND MR. JOHNSON, BUT GAINING
STRENGTH, IS FORMER GOV.
GEORGE C. WALLACE OF
ALABAMA, WITH 14 PER CENT OF
THE VOTE.
3/31/68 LBJ ANNOUNCES HE’S OUT
4/2/68: MCCARTHY WINS THE
WISCONSIN PRIMARY
4/4/68 MLK IS OUT
4/19/68 VICE-PRESIDENT
HUMPHREY IS IN
BUT IT IS TOO LATE FOR HIS NAME
TO BE ON ANY PRIMARY BALLOTS
 HE RUNS AS THE PRO-WAR
CANDIDATE FOR THE DEMS
PICKS UP MOST OF LBJ’S SUPPORT
NOTE: WITH LBJ OUT, THE
DELEGATES COULD VOTE FOR
ANYONE THEY WANTED TO…
HUMPHREY TRAVELS AROUND THE
COUNTRY TO SHORE UP PARTY
ORG SUPPORT
IN THE MEANTIME…

PRINCETON, N. J., April 20 --

Richard M. Nixon leads each of
the three top Democratic
Presidential hopefuls -- Senator
Robert F. Kennedy, Vice President
Humphrey and Senator Eugene J.
McCarthy -- in a nationwide
survey just completed by the
Gallup Poll. Mr. Nixon holds a 9-
point lead over Mr. Humphrey in
this Gallup survey of election
strength

MCCARTHY WINS A COUPLE

PRIMARY STATES
KENNEDY WINS A FEW PRIMARY
STATES
SOME “FAVORITE SON”
CANDIDATES WIN A COUPLE OF
STATES…
PRINCETON, N. J., May 11 -Both
Richard M. Nixon and Governor
Rockefeller lead the top three
Democratic Presidential
candidates -- Vice President
Humphrey, Senator Robert F.
Kennedy and Senator Eugene J.
McCarthy -- in the latest Gallup
Poll.

THE 1968 OREGON PRIMARY

RFK LOSES TO MCCARTHY
RFK COMMENT, “NOT ENOUGH
GHETTOS” IN OREGON…

BIG PRIMARY: CALIFORNIA, A

“WINNER TAKE ALL” PRIMARY
RFK WINS
AND IS LOOKING GOOD IN
ILLINOIS, FOR A WHILE…
CUT TO VIDEOS…
6/5/1968
AT THE MOMENT OF RFK'S DEATH,
THE DELEGATE TOTALS WERE:
 HUBERT HUMPHREY 561
 ROBERT KENNEDY 393
 EUGENE MCCARTHY 258
PRINCETON, N.J., July 10 -- Richard
M. Nixon trails Vice President
Humphrey by five percentage
points in the latest trial heats run
by the Gallup Poll, but Governor
Rockefeller is even with Mr.
Humphrey (Headline): Politics:
Gallup Poll Finds Humphrey Tops
Nixon and Runs Even With
Rockefeller; EX-VICE PRESIDENT
LAGGING, 35 TO 40% But Survey
Shows Wallace Gains Against
Governor

1968 DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION A

RIOT! LITERALLY
KENNEDY DELEGATES SUPPORT
HUMPHREY, NOT MCCARTHY
AFTER THE CONVENTION,
HUMPHREY IS BEHIND NIXON

NIXON WINS BY 1.1%

IN 1971 THE MCGOVERN-FRAZIER
COMMISSION IS FORMED
AND THEY LOOK AT THE 1968
ELECTION AND DECIDE: NOT
ENOUGH PRIMARIES
THEY COULD JUST HAVE EASILY
CONCLUDED THE OPPOSITE…
SO, IN 1972, FOR THE 1ST TIME
EVER, AND THEN FOREVER SINCE
 AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY OF
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL
CONVENTION DELEGATES
WILL BE CHOSEN THROUGH
DIRECT PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES
WHAT NOBODY SEEMED TO
UNDERSTAND UP TO THIS TIME
(BECAUSE PRIMARIES HAD NEVER
BEEN IMPORTANT)
IS THAT PRIMARY VOTERS ARE
“DIFFERENT” THAN GENERAL
ELECTION VOTERS
PIE CHOICE IN 1972=MCGOVERN
PARTY ORGANIZATION CHOICE:
HUMPHREY
MCGOVERN WINS THE
DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION BUT IS
 SEEN BY MANY DEMOCRATIC
ORGANIZATION FOLKS AS
UNDESIRABLE AND UNELECTABLE.
THEY CAMPAIGN FOR NIXON
AGAINST MCGOVERN.
MCGOVERN LOSES 49 STATES TO
NIXON
IN 1976, CONSERVATIVE BORN-
AGAIN CHRISTIANS ALMOST
NOMINATE
RONALD REAGAN OVER
PRESIDENT GERALD FORD FOR
THE REPUBLICANS
PIE CHOICE = REAGAN
PARTY ORGANIZATION CHOICE =
FORD
FORD WINS THE NOMINATION BUT
LOSES TO CARTER AS BORN AGAIN
FOLKS VOTE FOR CARTER

IN 1980, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY

ORGANIZATION THOUGHT THEY
HAD JUST
NOMINATED THEIR OWN VERSION
OF MCGOVERN WHEN REAGAN,
THE CHOICE OF
CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN
PARTY PRIMARY VOTERS WINS
OVER
THE CHOICE OF THE REPUBLICAN
PARTY ESTABLISHMENT, GEORGE
HW BUSH
 THERE WAS A STOP REAGAN
MOVEMENT THAT FAILED
YOU’D NEVER KNOW IT TODAY…
WHEN THAT FAILED, THE
REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT
TRIED TO GET REAGAN
TO PICK FORD AS HIS RUNNING
MATE
DURING THE CONVENTION, THE
POSSIBILITY OF CHOOSING
FORMER PRESIDENT GERALD
FORD AS THE VICE-PRESIDENTIAL
NOMINEE WAS GIVEN AT LEAST
SOME CONSIDERATION. FORD
ASKED FOR CERTAIN POWERS AND
PREROGATIVES THAT HAS BEEN
DESCRIBED AS MAKING FORD A
CO-PRESIDENT. THIS INCLUDED
THE RETURN OF HENRY KISSINGER
AS SECRETARY OF STATE AND THE
APPOINTMENT OF ALAN
 GREENSPAN AS SECRETARY OF
THE TREASURY. THE TWO SIDES
COULD NOT AGREE AND
ULTIMATELY, GEORGE BUSH WAS
CHOSEN LESS THAN 24 HOURS
BEFORE THE TICKET WAS
ANNOUNCED. (WIKIPEDIA)

CO-PRESIDENT: SOUND FAMILIAR?

THE DEMS COULD NOT BELIEVE

THEY HAD LOST THE PRESIDENCY
TO A PUNCHLINE
(LAUGHIN, NEWS OF THE FUTURE,
1968)
SO, THEY COME UP WITH PLANS
TO ENSURE THIS WOULD NEVER
HAPPEN AGAIN!
PLAN A: SUPERDELEGATES

TED KENNEDY FOUGHT CARTER

FOR THE DEMOCRATIC
NOMINATION IN 1980.
 BY THE TIME THE 1980
DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION WAS
HELD, IT WAS OBVIOUS
CARTER COULD NOT GET RE-
ELECTED (TO EVERYONE EXCEPT
JIMMY AND ROSALYN)
KENNEDY TRIED TO GET
CONVENTION RULE 11(H)
CHANGED FOR DELEGATES
ORIGINALLY
PLEDGED TO VOTE FOR CARTER
WOULD VOTE FOR KENNEDY
INSTEAD.
THE RULE WAS CHANGED FOR THE
1984 ELECTION BY THE HUNT
COMMISSION
AND BECOMES THE GENESIS OF
THE “SUPERDELEGATE”
PHENOMENON
THE BASIC PURPOSE OF
SUPERDELEGATES WAS TO ADD A
CHECK ON THE WILL OF
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS
THE FEAR WAS, IF THE DEMS ARE
ABOUT TO NOMINATE ANOTHER
MCGOVERN, THESE
PROFESSIONAL, ELECTED
DEMOCRATIC OFFICE-HOLDERS
(AND OTHERS) CAN PERHAPS
CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THE
NOMINATION
BY VOTING TOGETHER AS A BLOCK
FOR THE MOST ELECTABLE
CANDIDATE.
(NOTE: MOST OF THE 2008
SUPERDELEGATES ENDORSED
OBAMA)
SO, 1984 COMES AND GOES, AND
THIS IS WHAT THE ELECTION MAP
LOOKED LIKE IN NOVEMBER
 ANOTHER 49 STATE DISASTER
PLAN B: THE DLC IS FORMED
THE DLC IS AN INTEREST GROUP
THAT PERFORMS THE SAME
FUNCTION
THE PARTY ORGANIZATION
PERFORMED BEFORE 1972!
THEY DECIDE TO BACK GORE FOR
THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION IN
1988
GORE FINISHES IN 3RD PLACE IN A
3 WAY RACE
THE CHOICE OF THE DEMOCRATIC
PIE BECOMES THE NOMINEE IN
1988
IN ALL FAIRNESS, DUKAKIS WAS
AHEAD UNTIL THE WILLIE HORTON
AD APPEARED…
PLAN C
HOLD AUDITIONS AT PAMELA
HARRIMAN’S ESTATE IN VIRGINIA
THEN BACK WHOEVER PROMISES
TO DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO
WIN
THE DEMOCRATS WIN THE NEXT 3
GENERAL ELECTIONS (POPULAR
VOTE ONLY)
1992, 1996, 2000
BUT IN EVERY VICTORY, ARE
SEWN THE SEEDS OF DEFEAT…
IN 2000 R. NADER RIDES A WAVE
OF LIBERAL BACKLASH AGAINST
DLC WITHIN DEMOCRATIC PARTY
BY VOTING FOR NADER, LIBERALS
ELECTED BUSH!
2006: MORE CONSERVATIVE DEMS
+ ANTI-WAR VOTE BRINGS REGIME
CHANGE TO DC
FOR THE REPUBLICANS: THE
CHRISTIAN COALITION IS THE
REPUBLICAN VERSION OF THE DLC
EXCEPT, THE DLC MAKES DEMS
SEEM MORE REASONABLE, THE CC
MAKES REPUBLICANS SEEM LESS
SO…
2008 ELECTION
DEMOCRATS CARRY STATES THEY
HAVEN’T CARRIED SINCE 1964
POLITICAL PARTIES IN TEXAS:
HISTORIC DOMINANCE OF
DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO 1980S
CONSERVATIVE, WHITE,
CONFEDERATE DEMOCRATS
DOMINATE PARTY
REAGAN’S 1980 REPUBLICAN
PLATFORM RESEMBLES DIXIECRAT
PLATFORM OF 1948
HE EVEN ANNOUNCES HIS
CANDIDACY IN PHILADELPHIA,
MISS8ISSIPPI
REAGAN’S VICTORY MAKES
REPUBLICAN PARTY’S PLATFORM
PERFECTLY CONSISTENT WITH
 TRADITIONAL SOUTHERN
CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS
MANY TEXAS AND SOUTHERN
DEMS LEAVE THE PARTY, BECOME
REPUBICANS
OTHER DEMS LEAVE OFFICE, ARE
REPLACED BY REPUBLICANS
BY 1995; SOUTHERN WHITE
STATEWIDE OFFICEHOLDERS IN
TEXAS ARE EXTINCT
PARTY SHIFT IN TEXAS DOES NOT
MEAN AN IDEOLOGICAL SHIFT
THOUGH…
TIME PERMITTING: HOW THE
REAGAN AND BUSH FOLKS DON’T
GET ALONG…
AND WHY…
 Know the types of primaries
Direct
Preference (indirect)
Open
Closed
CLOSED PRIMARY STATES (LIKE
PA) REALLY HELP CAMPAIGNS TO
TARGET
SPECIFIC VOTERS BY HOME OR BY
PHONE (OR EVEN EMAIL)
AND MAKES IT EASIER TO “GET
OUT THE VOTE” ON OR BEFORE
ELECTION DAY
TEXAS IS AN OPEN PRIMARY
STATE
 YOU DON’T REGISTER AS A
DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN OR
INDEPENDENT
MAKES IT HARDER FOR PARTIES
TO TARGET SUPPORTERS AND GET
OUT THE VOTE
ON THE OTHER HAND,
TEXAS DOES HAVE EARLY VOTING,
PA DOES NOT…
MY 2008 PA 10TH DISTRICT
CAMPAIGN PHOTOS
THE “WAR” ROOM
YES, THEY LET ME IN!
THE LADY IN BLUE IS THE
CANDIDATE’S CHIEF OF STAFF
 SHE’D GET CALLS FROM STATE
ELECTION HQ WITH VOTING
RESULTS
THE GUY IN THE RED TIE WAS THE
CAMPAIGN LAWYER
(HE MADE US ALL LEAVE WHEN
THERE WERE PROBLEMS WITH THE
ELECTION RETURNS FROM NORTH
UMBRIDGE)
CANDIDATE IS IN BLUE TIE
THE GUY IN RED SHORTS AND
LONG COAT AT THE END OF THE
TABLE IS “SILENT BOB” (NOT
REALLY)
HIS TASK WAS TO ENTER THE
NUMBERS INTO A SPREADSHEET
AND READ OUT THE
PERCENTAGES…!!!
i