General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSince 1928, the Republicans have not won a presidential election...
Without either Richard Nixon or a member of the Bush Family on its ticket.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election
Something to think about when pondering Mitt's dilemma and what might be ahead in 2016...
ananda
(28,890 posts)Hoover.. Reagan to name two who were not Bush family or Nixon.
RockaFowler
(7,429 posts)NYC Liberal
(20,138 posts)Hoover/Curtis was the last Republican ticket to win without a Bush or Nixon (in 1928).
Poppy Bush was on Reagan's ticket as VP.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)And the OP is right. No winners w/o Nixon or a member of the Bush Crime Family ever since, though H.W. Bush lost in '92.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)KansDem
(28,498 posts)I don't know who backed Nixon, but we know the Bush Family goes back to at least Prescott Bush who tried to overthrow FDR. And we've had two generations of Bushes: as VP to Reagan, then as POTUS in 1988 (one term) and 2000 (two terms).
I'm beginning to think Romney is a sacrifice, just like Bob Dole was in 1996. So that begs the question, who will the "power brokers" put up in 2016?
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Blanks
(4,835 posts)hughee99
(16,113 posts)because even the repukes seem like they're all done with *.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)But after Mitt, who's to say?
Jeb may come out looking pretty good for 2016 (maybe as VP to some "Reaganesque" candidate?)