Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Almost President

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Almost President

    I just recived " Almost President" by Scott Farris. For those of you old enough to have read " They Also Ran" by Irving Stone it's about the same . In this book Scott Farris examines what would have happed if some one other that the president won the election . I am finding it interseting just thought I would let you all know if you are also interested .

  • #2
    I've always wondered how different history would have been if Goldwater had beaten Johnson, Dewey had beaten Truman, and Stevenson had beaten Eisenhower (the second time, in 1956).

    All three, Goldwater, Dewey and Stevenson, were exceptional men in their own right and would probably have made fine Presidents. But could they have shaped history differently, our would the world have turned out the same with history having shaped them?

    Cheers,
    Dan.
    So long as men worship the Caesars and Napoleons, Caesars and Napoleons will duly rise and make them miserable.

    Aldous Huxley: Ends and Means (1937)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Yankee View Post
      I just recived " Almost President" by Scott Farris. For those of you old enough to have read " They Also Ran" by Irving Stone it's about the same . In this book Scott Farris examines what would have happed if some one other that the president won the election . I am finding it interseting just thought I would let you all know if you are also interested .
      Sounds good. Does the book cover John Calhoun and Henry Clay?
      If the art of war were nothing but the art of avoiding risks,glory would become the prey of mediocre minds. Napoleon

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Dan M View Post
        I've always wondered how different history would have been if Goldwater had beaten Johnson, Dewey had beaten Truman, and Stevenson had beaten Eisenhower (the second time, in 1956).

        All three, Goldwater, Dewey and Stevenson, were exceptional men in their own right and would probably have made fine Presidents. But could they have shaped history differently, our would the world have turned out the same with history having shaped them?

        Cheers,
        Dan.
        So have I, I set up a discussion in the Alterante Histroy section but no one seemed interested. But I am always ready to discuss that subject at any time .

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Legate View Post
          Sounds good. Does the book cover John Calhoun and Henry Clay?
          the list in the tabel of contents is :
          1 Henry Clay
          2 Stephen Douglas
          3 William Jenning Brian
          4 Al Smith
          5 Thomas E. Dewey
          6 Adali Stevenson
          7 Barry Goldwater
          8 Geroge McGovern
          9 Ross Porot
          10 Al Gore,John Kerry,and John McCain .
          I was always taught in the High School ( 1960's )That the south seceeded because Lincolin was Elected . So I wonder what would have happend if Douglas were elected . I could discuss this at lenght at any time .

          Comment


          • #6
            Let's start off with Goldwater. (I'm afraid I don't have even half the knowledge of the American Presidency that you do to do all of the others. Ross Perot? G'or Blimey, pull the other one!)

            I think Goldwater was defeated by the media, who took his "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" statement from the 1964 Republican convention out of context. From this start, the media were able to continue portraying him as too extreme to be in charge of the nation's nuclear weapons, which caught on with the electorate.

            Goldwater was also facing an uphill battle competing against a popular Democratic President, whose popularity was based upon his succeeding the youngest President ever less than a year after that President's assassination.

            But the question is: what if?

            Would Goldwater have escalated the conflict in Vietnam by introducing American ground troops?

            Would he have recognized China before Nixon (presupposing two terms)?

            Would he have accelerated or decelerated the course of Civil Rights?

            Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact, Cuba; harder or softer line?

            And finally, I can only believe the entire make-up of the Supreme Court would have been totally different. What then, of Roe v Wade?

            Your thoughts?

            Cheers,
            Dan.
            So long as men worship the Caesars and Napoleons, Caesars and Napoleons will duly rise and make them miserable.

            Aldous Huxley: Ends and Means (1937)

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Dan M View Post
              Let's start off with Goldwater. (I'm afraid I don't have even half the knowledge of the American Presidency that you do to do all of the others. Ross Perot? G'or Blimey, pull the other one!)

              I think Goldwater was defeated by the media, who took his "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" statement from the 1964 Republican convention out of context. From this start, the media were able to continue portraying him as too extreme to be in charge of the nation's nuclear weapons, which caught on with the electorate.

              Goldwater was also facing an uphill battle competing against a popular Democratic President, whose popularity was based upon his succeeding the youngest President ever less than a year after that President's assassination.

              But the question is: what if?

              Would Goldwater have escalated the conflict in Vietnam by introducing American ground troops?

              Would he have recognized China before Nixon (presupposing two terms)?

              Would he have accelerated or decelerated the course of Civil Rights?

              Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact, Cuba; harder or softer line?

              And finally, I can only believe the entire make-up of the Supreme Court would have been totally different. What then, of Roe v Wade?

              Your thoughts?

              Cheers,
              Dan.
              Okay you hit me with to much at once. But yes On Vietnam he once said he would give the commnder in the feild the right to do as he felt . But Johnson worried about Chineses intervention , as they did in Korea,I feel Goldwater would not and even threaten them with someting to keep them out. Rememeber this is only my opion not gospel .
              And being Conservative I don't think civil rights were his thing. He may have shelved it in favor of help from the southren goveners . Because remember Geroge Wallece gave the word and the entier south went with Goldwater not with Johnson. ( Which was unusual at that time )
              And some people , not me , but some blame Johnson for the death of Kennedy . Just another consiracy theory ofcource. I belive he woudl have had a harder line on the entier Soviet block . How's that so far ?

              Comment


              • #8
                Interesting concept. I think of what could have happened had John McCain won the presidency. There would probably have been an escalation of the military involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan. As a result the number of body bags being shipped home to the US would have been grounds enough for most citizens to call for his removal from office. Then what? Why, Sarah Palin would have stepped into office....(I shudder at the thought)
                ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
                IN MARE IN COELO

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Yankee View Post
                  Okay you hit me with to much at once. But yes On Vietnam he once said he would give the commnder in the feild the right to do as he felt . But Johnson worried about Chineses intervention , as they did in Korea,I feel Goldwater would not and even threaten them with someting to keep them out. Rememeber this is only my opion not gospel .
                  And being Conservative I don't think civil rights were his thing. He may have shelved it in favor of help from the southren goveners . Because remember Geroge Wallece gave the word and the entier south went with Goldwater not with Johnson. ( Which was unusual at that time )
                  And some people , not me , but some blame Johnson for the death of Kennedy . Just another consiracy theory ofcource. I belive he woudl have had a harder line on the entier Soviet block . How's that so far ?
                  Goldwater was against the Federal Gov't interfering the affairs of individual states which is why he voted against the Civil Rights Bill in 1964. He certainly was for Civil Rights and equality as evidenced in his support for gays serving in the military and having the same rights as everyone else.
                  If the art of war were nothing but the art of avoiding risks,glory would become the prey of mediocre minds. Napoleon

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Yankee View Post
                    He may have shelved it in favor of help from the southern governers . Because remember George Wallace gave the word and the enter south went with Goldwater not with Johnson. ( Which was unusual at that time )
                    Weren't the Southern conservative Democrats referred to as Dixie-crats? Whatever happened to that wing of the Party, conservative Southern voters?

                    Originally posted by Legate
                    Goldwater was against the Federal Gov't interfering the affairs of individual states which is why he voted against the Civil Rights Bill in 1964. He certainly was for Civil Rights and equality as evidenced in his support for gays serving in the military and having the same rights as everyone else.
                    Two points. First of all I have to admit that I don't know what Goldwater's civil rights record was as a Senator, but as a supporter of the 10th Amendment he would have felt that it was a State's issue to decide. I would also put forward that a belief in State's Rights will lead to a politician being called all sorts of reactionary names by those who believe that the federal government should be the supreme and omnipotent power in America.

                    Second, I don't believe that Goldwater ever supported gays in the military in 1964. Didn't that come to the fore after he became senile shortly before his death?

                    But back to the Presidency. Would Dewey have agreed to an armistice in Korea, or would he have pressed for a complete victory?

                    Cheers,
                    Dan.
                    So long as men worship the Caesars and Napoleons, Caesars and Napoleons will duly rise and make them miserable.

                    Aldous Huxley: Ends and Means (1937)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Dan M View Post
                      Weren't the Southern conservative Democrats referred to as Dixie-crats? Whatever happened to that wing of the Party, conservative Southern voters?



                      Two points. First of all I have to admit that I don't know what Goldwater's civil rights record was as a Senator, but as a supporter of the 10th Amendment he would have felt that it was a State's issue to decide. I would also put forward that a belief in State's Rights will lead to a politician being called all sorts of reactionary names by those who believe that the federal government should be the supreme and omnipotent power in America.

                      Second, I don't believe that Goldwater ever supported gays in the military in 1964. Didn't that come to the fore after he became senile shortly before his death?

                      But back to the Presidency. Would Dewey have agreed to an armistice in Korea, or would he have pressed for a complete victory?

                      Cheers,
                      Dan.
                      True gay rights were not an issue in 1964. Much of that is from the '90s during Clinton terms.
                      I believe in examining a man's entire lifes work before evaluating whether or not he stood for Civil Rights.
                      If the art of war were nothing but the art of avoiding risks,glory would become the prey of mediocre minds. Napoleon

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        No,only J.Edgar did that.
                        This bass guitar kills TERRORISTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          As I said these are just my opinon okay

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Dan M View Post
                            Weren't the Southern conservative Democrats referred to as Dixie-crats? Whatever happened to that wing of the Party, conservative Southern voters?



                            Two points. First of all I have to admit that I don't know what Goldwater's civil rights record was as a Senator, but as a supporter of the 10th Amendment he would have felt that it was a State's issue to decide. I would also put forward that a belief in State's Rights will lead to a politician being called all sorts of reactionary names by those who believe that the federal government should be the supreme and omnipotent power in America.

                            Second, I don't believe that Goldwater ever supported gays in the military in 1964. Didn't that come to the fore after he became senile shortly before his death?

                            But back to the Presidency. Would Dewey have agreed to an armistice in Korea, or would he have pressed for a complete victory?

                            Cheers,
                            Dan.
                            I believe Dewey would have fought the war in Korea to it's conclusion.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X