| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:10 pm Post subject: Geraldine Ferraro is dead |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Geraldine Ferraro, who became the first woman to run for vice president on a major party ticket in 1984 -- only to lose in a landslide -- died Saturday. She was 75.
Ferraro died at Massachusetts General Hospital, where she was being treated for blood cancer, a disease she battled for 12 years, her family said
|
I remember that campaign very well. One thing I recall is that there were actually letters to Time Magazine expressing the opinion that a woman should not be a heartbeat away from the presidency. Not likely to encounter such sentiments today, largely because attitudes have changed, but also because, post-Palin, Republicans can't make that criticism anymore.
Anyway, RIP.
link |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I was very young during that campaign. Did she make for a credible candidate? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Did she make for a credible candidate? |
As far as I can remember, yeah, she did. Except for some controversy surrounding her husband's finances, which I don't think had much impact on the Democrats' fortunes overall, there weren't any major foul-ups on her part.
One thing you have to remember, though, is that the Democrats were expected to lose from the get-go, simply because Reagan was so popular. So, it's not like anyone was really looking for someone to blame for the defeat after the election was over. I think most objective observers would conclude that Mondale and Ferraro ran a decent and credible campaign, under the circumstances. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Did she make for a credible candidate? |
One thing you have to remember, though, is that the Democrats were expected to lose from the get-go, simply because Reagan was so popular. So, it's not like anyone was really looking for someone to blame for the defeat after the election was over. I think most objective observers would conclude that Mondale and Ferraro ran a decent and credible campaign, under the circumstances. |
That's interesting. Yeah, Reagan's Morning in America made him unassailable. An incumbent running again presiding over 6% growth and a rebound in employment is almost impossible to beat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I remember some time back Ferraro openly admitting that the only reason she was on the ticket was because she was a woman, and that it had nothing to do with her qualifications. That's no way to be choosing someone to be in waiting for our highest office, be it a Palin or a Ferraro. I wonder if she really believed that, though, given she said it to attempt to shield herself from criticism after she said Barack Obama was only where he was because he was black while speaking to support Clinton. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Did she make for a credible candidate? |
One thing you have to remember, though, is that the Democrats were expected to lose from the get-go, simply because Reagan was so popular. So, it's not like anyone was really looking for someone to blame for the defeat after the election was over. I think most objective observers would conclude that Mondale and Ferraro ran a decent and credible campaign, under the circumstances. |
That's interesting. Yeah, Reagan's Morning in America made him unassailable. An incumbent running again presiding over 6% growth and a rebound in employment is almost impossible to beat. |
Don't forget the blood of the 45 or so Grenadians that died so RR could be re-elected. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Space Bar
Joined: 20 Oct 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 27, 2011 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Did she make for a credible candidate? |
As far as I can remember, yeah, she did. Except for some controversy surrounding her husband's finances, which I don't think had much impact on the Democrats' fortunes overall, there weren't any major foul-ups on her part.
One thing you have to remember, though, is that the Democrats were expected to lose from the get-go, simply because Reagan was so popular. So, it's not like anyone was really looking for someone to blame for the defeat after the election was over. I think most objective observers would conclude that Mondale and Ferraro ran a decent and credible campaign, under the circumstances. |
She was from my district, and as I recall this is about right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kuros wrote:
| Quote: |
| Reagan's Morning in America made him unassailable. An incumbent running again presiding over 6% growth and a rebound in employment is almost impossible to beat. |
I do recall some hype during the primaries about Gary Hart being more viable than Mondale against Reagan, by virtue of being younger, more charismatic, etc than Mondale. But that, as I say, was probably mostly hype.
By the way, it was in reference to Gary Hart's supporters that I first recall the word "yuppie" being used. Shortly thereafter, Gary Trudeau did this cover for Newsweek, and a new word entered the English language, pretty mucn permanently.
Last edited by On the other hand on Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:53 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ya-Ta Boy wrote:
| Quote: |
| Don't forget the blood of the 45 or so Grenadians that died so RR could be re-elected. |
But I'm taken to understand that you're a supporter of Obama's current military intervention in Libya. What distinction would you see between Operation Urgent Fury and Operation Odyssey Dawn that would make you oppose the former but support the latter? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
Ya-Ta Boy wrote:
| Quote: |
| Don't forget the blood of the 45 or so Grenadians that died so RR could be re-elected. |
But I'm taken to understand that you're a supporter of Obama's current military intervention in Libya. What distinction would you see between Operation Urgent Fury and Operation Odyssey Dawn that would make you oppose the former but support the latter? |
^ Obama. My party, right or wrong. Eh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe he likes the Barbary Wars but not the Monroe Doctrine?
No. Its probably because the British supported this Libya action but opposed Grenada. We all know how much Ya-Ta loves the British. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joan Walsh in Salon has a column on Ferrarro's racial controversies during the 2008 primaries.
link |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
Ya-Ta Boy wrote:
| Quote: |
| Don't forget the blood of the 45 or so Grenadians that died so RR could be re-elected. |
But I'm taken to understand that you're a supporter of Obama's current military intervention in Libya. What distinction would you see between Operation Urgent Fury and Operation Odyssey Dawn that would make you oppose the former but support the latter? |
Good question.
Generally I'm opposed to war when there are other alternatives. I opposed Vietnam and Grenada, supported Gulf I but not Panama, supported Afghanistan (but am seriously waivering at this point), opposed Gulf II, and support the Libyan intervention but think NATO control is a transparent fig leaf fooling no one.
My reasons for supporting the Libyan intervention are: 1) prevention of a mass slaughter of citizens by an illegitimate government; 2) bringing the US out of its traditional role of supporting dictatorships in the Middle East and aligning us with a democratic movement; 3) the best opportunity in 42 years to oust an anti-American dictator with a known history of international terrorism and who I'm certain would again resort to terrorism if he stays; and 4) supporting allies whose access to a vital resource is endangered.
Grenada is an itsy bitsy teeny weeny Caribbean island without much geopolitical importance. I did not see how the form of its government in any way made any difference to the US. Its role, as I saw it, was a validation of Carter's much maligned comment about American malaise. Reagan was able to score a cheap and easy victory that acted as a morale booster for the country. Effective political theater, if you will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2011 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Maybe he likes the Barbary Wars but not the Monroe Doctrine?
No. Its probably because the British supported this Libya action but opposed Grenada. We all know how much Ya-Ta loves the British. |
I am fascinated by the Barbary Wars, but I didn't think I'd ever made that clear on line. When I was a kid I read a novel about some guy who was sailing to Italy but got captured and sold into slavery by the barbary pirates then saved when Stephen Decatur came to the rescue. Ripping good story. (I'm a sucker for any story with a sailing ship in it. ALL technological advance should have stopped with the clipper ships. There is never enough said for beauty.)
Clarification @ British: It isn't the British I object to--it's imperialism in general and British imperialism in particular. I blame it on George Washington. It didn't help that for 2 years here in Korea the only other English speakers I knew were a married couple whose favorite (and almost only) topic of conversation was how cricket is superior to baseball. It's possible some of my annoyance with them popped out in posts.
But this is getting pretty far away from the thread topic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
