For those who back HRC on "we should have gone with Muskie instead of McGovern" grounds:
The notion that McGovern could never have won but Ed Muskie could have is utter bullshit.
The truth is, Muskie(who, at age eleven, I originally preferred to McGovern, and who I still admire in many ways) was brought down by a trivial Nixon dirty trick in NH(McGovern's supporters were blameless in that, condemned Nixon's scumbags for their treachery, and did nothing at all to deserve being treated as if the dirty trick was somehow their fault). If Muskie could be stopped that easily with that little in a contest where only Democrats got to vote, he would have been total roadkill in a fall campaign as nominee-especially since Muskie NEVER set up a proper national campaign organization.
So no, 1972 does NOT prove that the pros should pick the nominee instead of the grassroots. And the landslide defeat in the fall(which was almost entirely the result of the Nixon China trip in February, '72, and had nothing to do with any stand McGovern took on the issues) does not mean the establishment candidate is always the best choice.
