General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Party Loyalty [View all]wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)Why not the quixotic campaign of Henry Wallace in 1948?
Why not the left's disdain for JFK in '60 - where there was a threat to (try and ) draft Adlai E. Stevenson from the convention floor? And then another near-revolt over Kennedy's selection of LBJ?
You wrote a similar OP back in 2008 and then, as now, you overlook the real campaign and election events to make your point. Take the 1980 election, for example.
As you wrote 7 years ago, Kennedy sought to take advantage of Carter's turmoil, believing it to be his "best chance at winning the presidency." Interesting, Kennedy still was not able to defeat an unpopular opponent.
But Kennedy had every right to run but his (and his supporter's) behavior at the convention was shameful.
1. Kennedy tried to get delegates released from their voting commitment to Carter.
2. Kennedy supporters openly harassed Carter's supporters on the convention floor with their "go home boll weevils" mantra. (a derogatory term for southern Democrats)
3. Kennedy would not raise Carter's hand in victory. There was national TV coverage of Carter almost chasing Kennedy around the stage just to shake his hand!
This was the biggest display of being a sore loser most will ever see in a presidential election. An attempt to change the rules, supporter intimidation, and the shunning of the nominee on national television at a national party convention.
There's a pattern of the left not accepting the will of the Democratic voting electorate. And it's displayed on DU daily with the complete denial of some that, yes, Hillary Clinton IS the leading candidate for the nomination.
Our party history has MANY examples of the left undermining the nominee. No amount of sugarcoating will change that.