The marginalization of "The Left" through the years. Not hearing us now at all.

[graham4anything]

28. It's called hindsight.

Look how miserable the people and the press treated the singular #1 liberal president,
far to the left of FDR, President Lyndon Johnson.

And look what the mass exodus from him in 1968 acheived

NOTHING but a few bright spots in a sea of 50 years of NOTHING AT ALL.

Damn shame in retrospect. Damn, damn shame.

LBJ would have beaten Nixon. The people should have begged him to run in 1968, both before Bobby even entered, and he would not have had LBJ not left, and then again after Bobby died.

HHH was a vastly inferior politician and ran with all of LBJ's baggage, and with NO acheivements on his own to give the people anything.

And most of the people have a blind spot here- HHH would have been the nominee had RFK not been killed anyhow.
Primaries and nominees were different then, and TPTB would have still nominated HHH.

Shame of it all.

Democratic party could have kept power for 53 years now (and even longer had the idiots who liked Ike voted twice for AES, a vastly better person and would have made a great President.

The damn shame is that ONE singular sentence in Eisenhower's life got all these supposed democratic people to seem to like Ike, while he was the original Ronald Reagan, and someone who was considered a very lightweight on the smarts level. One stupid sentence that was complete opposite of his whole life.

And the mistreatment of Jimmy Carter. Sheesh, besides the 3rd party/protesters that voted for John Anderson, they voted for Ronald Reagan and then Bush41.

(EVEN Elizabeth Warren, the Goddess to the left, she was a republican then and she voted for both Reagan and Bush41).

So, how did those who voted for Reagan/Bush41/Bush43 and will again do the same and vote against the democratic party in 2014 and 2016, how did that protest vote go for you all?
How is President Nader, I mean W do in 2000 and 2004? Because they all might have been clones of each other.
Ralph Nader was 100% correct in theory-just go the names of the party mixed up.
Two were one and the same. A vote for Nader directly 100% was a vote for W Bush.
voting for the Green Party in 2000 was THE EXACT SAME as voting for W.

Damn sure wish LBJ was reelected in 1968. Because had he been nominated, he would have won. Nixon couldn't beat LBJ. But anyone else, Nixon would have won.

BTW- LBJ was far to the left of Bobby Kennedy, in every single way.

And where were the voters in 1992 for Jerry Brown/Jesse Jackson?
How many supposed far left, refused to vote for Jerry because Jesse would have been the VP choice? I myself voted for Jerry twice, and twice cast my primary vote for Jesse Jackson.

Look at the 1968 electoral college vote, and tell me with all honesty that LBJ would not have beaten Nixon.
It would have been bloody, but he would have prevailed.

Funny how the mind plays tricks on people over the years, in hindsight, and retrospect, it is very easy to see. W won in 2004, LBJ would have won in 1968.
Because LBJ played the game better than HHH, and the same people who LOVED LBJ, had no extra reason to come out and vote for HHH(shades of 2010's other message besides the protest one).

In 2014- ALL DEMOCRATIC PARTY VOTERS must vote for the democratic candidate or the one who will caucus with them.
Becuase if you want all the liberal social issues, you sure as hell AIN'T gonna get them from a protest vote or the rpeublican(and both go to the republican candidate when the democratic candidate is not seated).