56,003
edits
Document:LP News 1972 April Issue 5: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Document:LP News 1972 April Issue 5 (view source)
Revision as of 12:07, 20 November 2020
, 20 November 2020no edit summary
m (CarynAnnHarlos moved page LP News 1972 April Issue 5 to Document:LP News 1972 April Issue 5) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 165: | Line 165: | ||
=POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE= | =POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE= | ||
==III. THE RISE OF TWO GEORGES== | ==III. THE RISE OF TWO GEORGES== | ||
In our last issue, we stated that, after the smoke clears, the Democratic Presidential candidate would probably be either "Humphrey, Muskie, or (possibly) Jackson" -- and went on to explain why the smart money would be on Hubert. | |||
Now, with Minnesota's crucial primary over and done with, the picture has altered a bit. Jackson is kaput. Muskie has slipped even further -- probably fatally, unless he can win big in Massachusetts or Pennyslvania. Indeed, Horrible Hubert would appear to have it bagged, were it not for the amazing squeeze play that ahs been executed by two men named George. | |||
Poor Hubert! Despite his having bested Ed Muskie twice, he has yet to win a primary. There he is, Lord of the Democratic Center, and two upstarts on the Left and Right have stolen his thunder. In the long run, he will probably still emerge the victor, but not iwhtout a long, hard fifth. And there is even the possibility that he may be beaten out by a strange coalition of the alienated. | |||
For, much to the old politician's chagrin, it appears that alienation is the name of the game this year. The people are out for the Establishment's blood, and George Wallace and George McGovern have struck responsive chords. | |||
On the Left, McGovern has apparently captured the erstwhile supporters of McCarthy, Lindsay, Harris, and Chisholm -- emerging, after only four primaries, as the champion of the dispossessed ultra-liberals. This bloc makes up perhaps a third of the party, and, acting in concert, has a long-short chance at gaining the nomination for "one of their own." (In many respects, the McGovern campaign is reminiscent of the Goldwater campaign in '64.) | |||
On the Right, George Wallace has pushed Mills, Yorty, and Jackson in virtual oblivion, emerging as the hero of that 25% or so who are doomed to everlasting exclusion from the Seats of Power, but who often decide which of the orthodox receive the prize. | |||
Thus, between them, the two Georges have m managed to siphon off a majority of Democratic voters -- leaving Big Ed and Hubie to fight over the 40% or so in the middle. The victor in this fight will probably wind up the nominee, but not without making concessions to one or both of the dissidents' leaders. | |||
This is a development to be welcomed, for any rebellion against the Establishment is to our benefit ... and the deeper the rifts between the various Democratic factions, the better our chances at picking up the supports of the losers, come September. | |||
Of course, neither Wallce nor McGovern is a libertarian, by any means. But both of them have their libertarian aspects, and both are identifiably anti-status-quo, which is more than can be said for Nixon or HHH. In fact, between them, you could put together one fairly decent candidate -- something that not even Merlin the Magician could do, given Nixon and Hubie as his sources of raw material. | |||
=BITS & PIECES= | =BITS & PIECES= | ||