Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:20 PM Mar 2015

History Stacked Against Third Democratic Term



Rhodes Cook: “The 2016 Democratic presidential nominee–whomever it turns out to be–will face resistance from recent history. Since the end of the 20-year Democratic run in the White House that began with Franklin D. Roosevelt and ended with Harry Truman, there have been six occasions when either major party could have extended its control of the White House to three terms. But this has happened only once: when Republican George H.W. Bush in 1988 won what some have called Ronald Reagan’s third term.”

###

http://p.feedblitz.com/r3.asp?l=103400370&f=17571&u=37190363&c=4915310
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
History Stacked Against Third Democratic Term (Original Post) DonViejo Mar 2015 OP
And when they DO win (*cough* Gore *cough*) the voting machines are stacked against them. Gidney N Cloyd Mar 2015 #1
No, they don't brooklynite Mar 2015 #6
History is current, but not exactly as you think. mmonk Mar 2015 #2
Yeah, and presidential elections are much more demographically driven now .../NT DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #7
The repubs linked Gore to Clinton .... groundloop Mar 2015 #3
The real challenge is the 4th term Proud Public Servant Mar 2015 #4
Question: Was history stacked against an African American President? FSogol Mar 2015 #5

brooklynite

(94,868 posts)
6. No, they don't
Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:02 PM
Mar 2015

It was BECAUSE of the Bush/Gore election problems that electronic voting machines were introduced.

mmonk

(52,589 posts)
2. History is current, but not exactly as you think.
Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:29 PM
Mar 2015

Nothing in our lifetimes is quite like this unless you want to go back to the early 1920's. We'll have to see.

groundloop

(11,529 posts)
3. The repubs linked Gore to Clinton ....
Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:39 PM
Mar 2015

The repubs managed to whip up quite the feeding frenzy with the Monica affair, and managed to equate Al Gore to Bill Clinton. Additionally, a certain third party candidate may have drawn a few votes away from Gore.

So far the repubs seem to have struck out in their attempt to whip up a scandal associated with President Obama, thus they won't have nearly as much ammunition. They're trying desperately to turn Benghazzzzzzzzzi and/or email-gate into their scandal de jour, but thus fare don't seem to be having much luck.

I just don't see many similarities between now and when W 'won'.

Proud Public Servant

(2,097 posts)
4. The real challenge is the 4th term
Mon Mar 23, 2015, 01:58 PM
Mar 2015

There haven't been back-to-back 2-term presidents from the same party since Madison and Monroe (1809-1825).

FSogol

(45,574 posts)
5. Question: Was history stacked against an African American President?
Mon Mar 23, 2015, 02:01 PM
Mar 2015

We will take a third term and a fourth. It is imperative to rebuild the Supreme Court.

GOTV, DU.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»History Stacked Against T...