Document:McGovern the Dangerous Decoy: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Document:McGovern the Dangerous Decoy (view source)

Revision as of 18:31, 21 July 2021

81 bytes removed ,  21 July 2021
no edit summary
No edit summary
Line 49: Line 49:
And then for good measure, let's throw in all of the Pacific states (California, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska on top of the already-conceded Hawaii).  This give McGovern another 63 points, for a total of 214.
And then for good measure, let's throw in all of the Pacific states (California, Washington, Oregon, and Alaska on top of the already-conceded Hawaii).  This give McGovern another 63 points, for a total of 214.


Andfinally. fOI' the beck of it. let', toa in Michipn 121 ,-otsl and the Senator', home elate of South Dakota 141. 'The total ie
And finally, for the heck of it, let's throw in Michigan (21 votes) and the Senator's home state of South Dakota (4). The total is now 239 or 31 short of victory. And that's it. There is not one other state which McGovern has the slightest hope of carrying. (Illinois is hopeless, without Daley's doing his damnedest.) Texas? Don't be silly-HHH got only 41 percent of the vote. Missouri? Humphrey carried it by a razor's edge, with Wallace drawing 25 times the vote which separated HHH from Nixon-and it is hard to conceive of those Wallaceites voting for McGovern. Wisconsin? Conceivable, but Nixon best HHH by 4 percentage, with Wallace drawing an additional 8 percent... and Wisconsin has only 12 electoral votes in any case.
_.    239. OI' 31 .a-t of victory. And that'•
it. 11left ii not ooe other etate which McGO'\wn bu  the elightst hope of ­ lllinoi,  i,    hopeleu,   without   Daley',
-8IIJIPO'! ...  andeven then, would be unlikely. Ullinoie went fOI' Nixon owrHumpbreybyover 100,000votes, ewn with Daley doin« hie damndeet.l Tau? Doo't be eilly-HhH gotooly 41 pesunt of tb,e 'Ote. Miaolui? Humphrey carried it by a razor', with Wallace drawing 25 times the vote which aeparated HHH from
Nixoo--and it ii hard to conceive of thoee Wallaceites voting for McGovern. Wac:umn? Cooceivable. but Nixon bNt
HRH by 4 pesunt, with Wallace drawins an additional 8 percent .••  and w    bu ooly 12 electoral wtee in any cue.
'The Deep South, South-a. MidwNt. and  Mountain Staa areanabeolute deeert fOI' Mc:GoYem; eu,re the Democrau in Nebnub Ifor inetancel voted fOI' him in the primary, u did thoee in New Mexico fwbere hie ooly  t - Wallacel, but hie
cbanoee of canying any of the elates in ti­
re,iooe in Nowmber are a Rat a.ero.
No. e'\'ell conceding him a number ol etats which be ie by DO meant certain to carry (e.g. California, Maryland, Penn­ sylvania, and Mic:hipnl, one finde it im• poaible to rationally envieion a McGovern victory.
So. e'\'ell if one viewe McGovern u Evil Incarnate. ten timee wone than Nixon, one abouJd feel under DO compu)aion to ,0 vote fOI' Richard the Lyin'-8earted, if one', motivation ie limply to prevent McGovern'• election.
But what if one'• motivation ii not aimply to keep McGovern out ol the White n-? What if it •  to  make  IUre  that McGovern, and all be 1tanda fOI', ii -
repudiated at the  po&?
A laudable motivation,  tbil--but  one
which carriee within it a deadly trae. And tbie ie that one cannot overwhelm McGovern without limultaneoualy giving Nixon an overwhelming  endor,emenr. A    land1lide
victory fOI' Nixon will deliver the GOP into the haoda of ite Democrat-aping faction forever, and  will give RMN a blank chedt to do  whatever be cl. fothnext  four yeen. !Remember LBJ'• performance after hie victOl'Y over Goldwater?I Nixon, and hie equivalente in future yean. will be able to eay "See, it  ien't ..-rytomake  any OODCHliom to the minimal-government ad'\'OC&tel; we didn't in '72, and we still won by a laodllide."
In RUii, thegreatelt danger McGovern poeee ie not that be will win, and lead U1 down the road to oblivion, but that hie candidacy itaeU will do two tbinp.


Finl, it will move the entire apectnun of political debate in thie country abarply towarda oollectivilm. Simply by virtue of the fact that be ii  the Preaidential nominee of a
The Deep South, Southwest, Midwest, and Mountain States are an absolute desert for McGovern; sure, the Democrats in Nebraska (for instance) voted for him in the primary, as did those in New Mexico (where his only opponent was Wallace), but his chances of carrying any of the states in these regions in November are a flat zero.
major   party,  McGovern   will bring tability  to propoula which, u  recently u
 
fifteeo yean a,o, would havecate,oriaed any
No, even conceding him a number of states which he is by no means certain to carry (e.g. California, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Michigan), one finds it impossible to nationally envision a McGovern victory.
politician who eepou-1 them • a candidate IOI' the funny farm, rather than fOI' the Presidency.
 
Second-and more critically-he will wfirimiu NWHL Whether be1- by a wide or a narrow one, he will give Nixon a mandate to move towards Total Statism at an accelerated pace.
So, even if one views McGovern as Evil Incarnate, ten times worse than Nixon, one should feel under no compulsion to go vote for Richard the Lyin'-Hearted, if one's motivation is simply to prevent McGovern's election.
 
But what if one's motivation is not simply to keep McGovern out of the White House?  What if it is to make sure that McGovern, and all he stands for, is overwhelmingly repudiated at the polls?
 
A laudable motivation, this-but one which carries within it a deadly trap. And that is that one cannot overwhelm McGovern without simultaneously giving Nixon an overwhelming endorsement. A landslide victory for' Nixon will deliver the GOP into the hands of its Democrat-aping faction forever, and  will give RMN a blank check to do whatever he chooses for the next four years. (Remember LBJ's performance after his victory over Goldwater?) Nixon, and his equivalent in future years, will be able to say "See, it isn't necessary to make any concessions to the minimal-government advocates; we didn't in '72, and we still won by a landslide."
 
In sum, the greatest danger McGovern poses is not that he will win, and lead us down the road to oblivion, but that his candidacy itself will do two things.
 
First, it will move the entire spectrum of political debate in this country sharply towards collectivism. Simply by virtue of the fact that he is the Presidential nominee of a major party. McGovern will bring respectability to proposals which, as recently as
fifteen years ago, would have categorized any politician who espoused them as a candidate for the funny farm, rather than for the Presidency.
 
Second-and more critically-he will legitimize Nixon. Whether he loses by a wide or a narrow one, he will give Nixon a mandate to move towards Total Statism at an accelerated pace.


At first, this analysis appears to leave no hope for those of us who oppose this trend towards statism. If we go to the polls and vote for Nixon, in order to crush McGovern, we implicitly endorse Nixon's policies If, on the other band, we stay home, and Nixon wins only narrowly, the socialists in both parties can say "See, our idea aren't too far out, nearly half the voters support them." Either way, the oollectivists win.
At first, this analysis appears to leave no hope for those of us who oppose this trend towards statism. If we go to the polls and vote for Nixon, in order to crush McGovern, we implicitly endorse Nixon's policies If, on the other band, we stay home, and Nixon wins only narrowly, the socialists in both parties can say "See, our idea aren't too far out, nearly half the voters support them." Either way, the oollectivists win.
Line 81: Line 76:
McGovern must be recognized for what he is.... a decoy, whose greatest danger is that he will lure us into voting for Nixon, as 'the 1esser of two evils." It will take courage to resist this temptation. And it will take an extra effort to vote for Dr. Hoapen and Mn. Nathan, as this will have to be done by write­-in, in most states. But it must be done, for what is at stake is nothing less than the future of freedom in America.
McGovern must be recognized for what he is.... a decoy, whose greatest danger is that he will lure us into voting for Nixon, as 'the 1esser of two evils." It will take courage to resist this temptation. And it will take an extra effort to vote for Dr. Hoapen and Mn. Nathan, as this will have to be done by write­-in, in most states. But it must be done, for what is at stake is nothing less than the future of freedom in America.


=Break Free From Big Brother. Vote Libertarian.=
=Break Free From Big Brother. Vote Libertarian.=


Vote for Dr. John Hospers and Mrs. Tonie Nathan for President and Vice-President of the United States, on November 7, 1972. If they're not on the ballot in your state, find out how to cast a write-in vote.
Vote for Dr. John Hospers and Mrs. Tonie Nathan for President and Vice-President of the United States, on November 7, 1972. If they're not on the ballot in your state, find out how to cast a write-in vote.


Contribute  to the Hospers-Nathan campaign. Checks should be made out to Libertarun Party C•mp•ign
Contribute  to the Hospers-Nathan campaign. Checks should be made out to Libertarian Party Campaign Fund, and sent to the Fund at 1415 N. El Paso, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80906.
Fund,and sent to the Fund at 1415 N. El Paso, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80906.


Join the Libertarian Party, aa an active member. Annual dues are S4 for students, S6 for regular mem­ bership, and S12 for sustaining membership. Checks should be made out to Li rt•run P•rty, and sent to the Party's National Headquarters, 7748 Lowell Blvd., Westminster, Colorado 80030.
Join the Libertarian Party, aa an active member. Annual dues are S4 for students, S6 for regular mem­ bership, and S12 for sustaining membership. Checks should be made out to Libertarian Party, and sent to the Party's National Headquarters, 7748 Lowell Blvd., Westminster, Colorado 80030.
Retrieved from "https://lpedia.mywikis.net/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1556418"

Navigation menu