33 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 77.9 ms ] thread
I never really understood why he lost so badly to Reagan.
Reagan was very popular, the US was on an upswing, and Mondale came across with a very wooden personality. The message seemed more positive from Reagan.
We were still in a HUGE recession when Regan took over and had a period of inflation and mortgages had an interest rate of 12% and higher.

This was more a reflection on how badly things went under Carter and not about Mondale. Mondale should have never been the candidate.

The argument is roughly "incumbent, economy, sexism" in that order. When things have recently trended positively (particularly with the economy), as they did in 1984, the incumbent almost always wins in the US.

On Sexism, Mondale chose Ferraro as his running mate (the first major party ticket with a woman!). This wasn't received well overall: "only 22% of women were pleased about her selection, versus 18% who agreed that it was a bad idea. 60% of all voters thought that pressure from women's groups had led to Mondale's decision, versus 22% who believed that he had chosen the best available candidate." [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_United_States_presidentia...

> 60% of all voters thought that pressure from women's groups had led to Mondale's decision, versus 22% who believed that he had chosen the best available candidate

I'd imagine some people felt that both statements were true. Measuring opinion is an interesting challenge.

All of that explains why he lost, but perhaps, not why he lost SO BADLY. He only won his home state of Minnesota and only did so by .18% (<4000 votes)!!!

It really was an amazingly epic blowout.

Yes. Note that Al Gore lost his home state of Tennessee in his 2000 bid for the presidency. If Gore had won TN, Florida wouldn't have mattered as much.
> The argument is roughly "incumbent, economy, sexism" in that order.

Also personality? I wasn't even alive during that election, but I've seen videos of Reagan's (quite good) jokes during those debates. I've never seen anything from Mondale, so it's likely that he didn't leave nearly as good of an impression.

During the general campaign, he openly vowed to raise taxes. Even in the Democratic primaries, in 2020, Elizabeth Warren went from front-runner to done the moment she awkwardly acknowledged that taxes would go up under her health plan.

So in a general election, in the 1980's? Forget it. Americans do NOT want to pay for anything themselves. Not then, not now. Even America's version of a left only believes that taxes should go up for other people, not themselves.

Most people don’t know this, but 46% of all households pay zero income tax. https://www.statista.com/statistics/242138/percentages-of-us...

I think if we actually made everyone pay taxes, as more-socialist countries in the EU do that the American left raves about, there would be a lot less support for raising taxes. Right now “taxing the rich” is easy because so few people pay any taxes!

"Most people" don't know this? It was the centerpiece of Mitt Romney's last presidential campaign and one of the most popular conservative media ecosystem talking points for years. It's hardly a secret.

Also extremely misleading since labor income is only one taxable transaction among many that most people take part in, this doesn't account for state income tax, and it also doesn't account for FICA tax, which is federal and still based on labor income.

Highly misleading since they still pay social security tax, and Medicare tax.

Those alone are almost 10% (and that's not even touching sales tax, property tax, etc)

But to be fair, those aren't the taxes that get raised when one raises taxes. They raise the portion that is effectively zeroed out for a large portion of households who don't earn above the cutoff for the first tax bracket after deductions.
Well, the left believes that they should go up on other people, not the "regular voters". But it's always a lie, because we never have enough "other people". When we're going to raise taxes to pay for more government, we're going to raise your taxes.

Note well: This is not excusing the insane amount of tax loopholes for the rich.

RIP. I will admit that my first reaction was "Walter Mondale was still alive?". 93 years is a pretty good run!
Henry Kissinger is still alive (and giving terrible "advice" to conservative politicians).
I think more amusingly for this audience is his involvement with Theranos via George Schultz (who died in February).
What do you mean by “conservative” politicians?

The first President (after Nixon era) to resuscitate Kissinger was Bill Clinton:

“Bill Clinton, embraced Kissinger, which began Kissinger’s apotheosis into his current incarnation as a bipartisan elder statesman, invoked by politicians who want to appear “serious.””

From:

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/henry-kissinger-hi...

—-

Obama Era

He was an advisor to Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State in the Obama administration and was instrumental in shaping policies like Honduras, Syria, Libya etc..

“The two former secretaries of state have been close for years, with Clinton calling him "a friend" and noting that she "relied on his counsel" when she was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.”

From: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-henry-clintons-relat...

You made a mistake and think the present party system was the same back than.

Nixon actually presented a Health Care Plan

Nixon's Words “Without adequate health care, no one can make full use of his or her talents and opportunities. It is thus just as important that economic, racial and social barriers not stand in the way of good health care as it is to eliminate those barriers to a good education and a good job.”

https://www.nixonfoundation.org/2015/11/the-nixon-comprehens...

Nixon was also quite racist. The War on Drugs targeted minority groups. There's a lot that could be written about all this.
If we go by that then so was good ol' Clinton and mr Biden.
Biden is moving in the right direction though.
Biden has two advantages, one he is not dead, two, he's in a position to show change. It's possible given the same circumstance, messrs. Clinton and Nixon would arrive at the same place.
So what did he do to limit police brutality?

Limit qualified immunity for rogue cops by signing into law an act of Congress?

Eliminate civil forfeiture?

By that logic and reasoning Joe Biden and his crime bill and Bill Clinton who signed it into law are much bigger and effective racists:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_Crime_Control_and_Law_...

Nixon also did the government affirmative action for minorities under the Philadelphia Plan:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Philadelphia_Plan

> By that logic and reasoning Joe Biden and his crime bill and Bill Clinton who signed it into law are much bigger and effective racists

Well, sure.

Yep. It is up to everyone to keep up the pressure on the current administration for further reforms, and to create a more fair and just society. The struggle isn't over. The struggle is never over.
HK is still stuck in the mindset of the cold war. He has not extricated himself from that and pretty much lives off his olive branch to China initiative. Cohen was a better resource on Russia.
I remember thinking the same 25 years ago when he was ambassador to Japan. He had a good run after leaving the VP office.
It's funny to think that if Buddy Holly were alive today he'd be 8 years younger than Mondale. People who've lived a long time connect to a world that seems so distant it feels like an entirely different era of existence.