Fear and Loathing in Nixonland - WI Democratic Debate

(1/1)

Lumine:
Debate Overview

All those candidates who filed in for the Wisconsin Primary will be able to attend a primary debate on the eve of voting.

You will each get to deliver a general statement on your campaign, answer a question, and each candidate will get to launch one major attack on another primary candidate (think of it as answering three questions, but guided).

Your answers will have (via Discord or PM, NOT here) to be sent until Friday at midnight. Then they will be posted, and we will have a brief rebuttal phase. This is to ensure there's some fog of war, and that people have to think carefully about their strategy.

At the end of the turn, I will grade your debate peformances. The winner gets a major polling boost, the loser - if it's too lopsided - gets a major polling penalty. Other performances will be judged in terms of whether they won or lost support.

So, the attending candidates will be: Humphrey, Lindsay, McCarthy, Yorty, Hartke, Byrd and McGovern.

You can choose not to attend without an immediate penalty, but if you don't attend and get attacked anyway, or if a candidate attracts support from your own base, you'll see the effect.

Debate - First Phase
(no more than 200 words per answer please)

Quote

1.- Although some candidates are better known than others, it is the first time that most Wisconsin voters will be acquainted by several of those standing here tonight. So, in simple words, how would you introduce yourself and the main point of your candidacy to the voters?

2.- The nation has been surprised with a series of surprise rulings, reports and statements, including issues like marijuana issue, pre-marital sex, the Equal Rights Amendment, and domestic terror (see news updates in the last two-three turns). What do you make of it? Should the people of Wisconsin be thrilled... or worried?

3.- If you had to criticize one of the candidates in this primary, who would it be? And why for?

So remember, four days to answer these three questions, send them to me privately, and I'll let you know when we get to the rebuttal phase.

Lumine:
Debate - First Phase
ATTENDING CANDIDATES: Humphrey, Lindsay, McCarthy, Yorty, Hartke and Byrd

Quote

1.- Although some candidates are better known than others, it is the first time that most Wisconsin voters will be acquainted by several of those standing here tonight. So, in simple words, how would you introduce yourself and the main point of your candidacy to the voters?

JOHN LINDSAY: This election isn’t about me or any one man; there’s too much at stake in this battle for our country’s soul.  If elected, I’ll do what Nixon and Johnson should’ve and could’ve done years ago and immediately bring our boys home from Vietnam - including all POWs - and issue a blanket pardon for anyone who evaded the draft. I’ll fight tirelessly for the ERA, the Clean Water Act, the Soup Kitchen Act, a $2.50 minimum wage, and the repeal of Taft-Hartley.

I’ll also reform the VA because when our boys risk their lives for our freedom, the least we can do is make sure they come home to quality healthcare and meaningful job opportunities.  Instead of terrorizing college kids and harassing Freedom Riders, the Lindsay Justice Department will aggressively target domestic terrorists like the Ku Klux Klan.

At the same time, our cities will be both safe and secure and I’m the only candidate  in the race with a track record proving I can make good on that promise.  Since I took office as Mayor of NYC, there have been no race riots, we’re winning the war on police corruption, and we’ve put over 5,000 new cops on the street.

EUGENE MCCARTHY: Firstly I’d like to thank the moderators for hosting this dialogue between candidates. To the voters of Wisconsin, when you make your most crucial decision in this primary and ask what differentiates the candidates on the stage here tonight, I ask that you put your trust in me as you did four years ago by looking to my record. I am the only candidate who has consistently opposed the immoral and unconstitutional war in Vietnam and upheld the values of the Democratic Party.

In my time campaigning for the office of President both this year and in 1968, I have found that Americans of all stripes are weary of the endless violence overseas. It’s for this reason that I advocate, as I always have, an immediate American withdrawal from Southeast Asia, immediate amnesty for all who chose not to fight and a longer overhaul of American foreign policy, so that we may act as a force for peace and human rights in the modern world. It is my belief that by securing the peace overseas we may also do so at home with crucial investments in healthcare, infrastructure and civil rights and that is what a McCarthy administration would accomplish.

ROBERT BYRD: (Good evening). First off, I would like to thank [Debate host], as well as my esteemed opponents on this stage. I am Senator Robert Byrd, and have represented the great state of West Virginia in the Greatest Legislative Body in the world. I am the Majority Leader, and have worked and passed legislation with some of the fellas on this stage. I am running for President, because we have several crises facing our nation, and with President Nixon at the helm, things have only gotten worse. We need to withdraw from Viet-nam with an honorable peace, not prolong the war or bring tensions back up. If I am elected, I pledge to end the war before the end of my first 100 days. I will work with leaders on both sides to seek a compromise on busing, and we will restore honor to the White House.

SAM YORTY: I'm Sam Yorty, mayor of the nation's third largest city and a warrior for the rights of Middle America. The beating heart of this country—the working people often overlooked—deserves to have a leader who will speak their mind and stand up for what is right. This is not a campaign of equivocation, retreat, or coddling of society's worst elements. We in the party, and the country, have suffered too much already from those sleeping at the wheel. I'm running to change that.

Since day one, I have warned about the radical takeover when other leading candidates have stayed muted and on the sidelines. New Hampshire and Illinois were warning signs. In both states, our campaign has overcome all the odds and expectations to forge powerful coalitions against this threat. No other candidate can claim the same. We have the drive and the ideas to bring Democrats across the spectrum together, reclaim our party from those who seek to burn it down, and bring accountability in defeat to President Nixon for his failures. My city of Los Angeles has blossomed after we brought representation to the neglected, not just the very few elites. Now it is America's time.

HUBERT HUMPHREY: My name is Hubert Horatio Humphrey, I have served as Mayor of Minneapolis, Vice President of the United States, and United States Senator for Minnesota. I have been at the forefront for each cause of the people for the last twenty-five years, when future laws were only ideas and when future strong majorities were only bold and intrepid individuals. I was for a comprehensive Civil Rights Act in 1948, 15 years before I helped get it done. I was for the nuclear test-ban in 1953, ten years before I helped get it done, and I was for public medical insurance for the elderly, 16 years before Medicare, and for my entire career I have stood in opposition to the Taft-Hartley Act and I believe we will repeal it.

I am running for President because I believe I am best positioned to achieve victory for today's causes of the people, those being realizing the comprehensive desegregation of our society, peace on our planet, universal health insurance and quality education, an end to poverty, and full employment. Together, we will get this done, and I am ready to lead us, so I am asking for your vote.

VANCE HARTKE: Friends, I have crisscrossed the great expanse of your state on a single basis: let us speak truth to the people. Our Founding Fathers broke away from Great Britain because they had had enough of King George's duplicity. They declared that America trusted the intelligence of her citizens to handle the rigors of democracy. I repeat these ideals because I find them so lacking in the Nixon administration. Instead of peace with honor, we have war without end. Rather than law and order, we have a 30 billion dollar deficit, an overheating economy, runaway inflation, and unsustainable mortgages.

The secret plans and sudden reversals further define the administration's contempt for everyday Americans. Despite the Vice President’s recent claims, there is nothing moderate about it. In fact, it is radical in its shamelessness! I am in this race because I believe America deserves better. We deserve leadership capable of bringing timely peace abroad and real strength at home. Leadership that is open to the public, not beholden to special interests, and aware of the responsibility that it has to good governance for all. I intend to deliver this without compromise.

Quote

2.- The nation has been surprised with a series of surprise rulings, reports and statements, including issues like marijuana issue, pre-marital sex, the Equal Rights Amendment, and domestic terror (see news updates in the last two-three turns). What do you make of it? Should the people of Wisconsin be thrilled... or worried?

JOHN LINDSAY: For better or worse, I think our country is in a place of sweeping change.  That will be the case no matter who wins this year.   Here is the type of change I believe in and that I will fight for: I dream of an America where diversity doesn’t mean some politician having a token black surrogate at a campaign rally; it means giving black voices a meaningful seat at the table.  I dream of an America where our boys will never again be asked to die for a mistake simply because the President is too cowardly to honor their sacrifice by only putting them in harm’s way unless it is truly necessary.  I dream of an America where women’s rights are enshrined in our Constitution.

I dream of an America whose government works hand-in-hand with organized labor to protect the working-class instead of serving corporate elites.  I dream of an America where a person’s future isn’t dictated by their race, gender, or what street they were born on, but by their work ethic and character.  This is the American dream I believe in and this is the future that I will fight for if elected.

EUGENE MCCARTHY: If the Democratic Party wishes to survive, we must continue to stand as a party of progress. I would not hesitate as President to stand for the rights of the downtrodden in society. Our current administration has sought to divide Americans against each other with an idea of a “silent majority” with which he can mobilize against his opponents.  I say we as a party must reject this framing and work to bring Americans together which can only be done by providing for the needs of all citizens. My administration would accomplish this through sustained vigorous enforcement of desegregation and investment.

Through swift passage of the Equal Rights Amendment, equal pay measures and federally guaranteed maternity leave. Through following the recommendations of the Shafer Commission, reforming our justice system and ending the pernicious ideology of solving social ills by throwing more police at them. Some of my proudest moments in Congress were securing passage of the Civil and Voting Rights Acts thereby guaranteeing constitutional rights for all Americans. For anyone in this party to look at that record and say it would be preferable to reverse course is completely antithetical to the values of this party.

ROBERT BYRD: The people of Wisconsin should be worried about the recent upheaval of society as a result of these reports and news. We need to pass the Equal Rights Amendment, and I am very proud of my work with Senator Bayh on passing Title IX and submitting the Equal Rights Amendment for passage to the states. However, we need to strengthen laws to punish those caught in possession of harmful substances. As President, I will use the tools in my power to go after those seeking to disrupt our livelihoods and terrorize our people.

SAM YORTY: There is great reason to be worried, and no American should feel guilty for feeling so. In many ways, my campaign has also been motivated by addressing the social rot that our political class has allowed to spread. I think back to my Catholic upbringing, to the quaint but comfortable life in the Midwest that my family was blessed with like many others. We are in danger of losing that for future generations if we continue to descend to rampant crime, drug proliferation, and loose moral codes.

There is a reasonable role Washington can play in bringing balance by enforcing values, and it goes in hand with enforcing the law. That will be my approach as President. I've been unafraid to call out judicial activism on the trail when I see it, and we sadly see it more often now. I denounced my state of California's ruling on the death penalty some months ago when they let brutal murderers like Charles Manson evade true justice. While our federalist system will always allow states to experiment on the best policies, Americans can be assured that I will provide a necessary check on the excesses.

HUBERT HUMPHREY: I think there are two questions there, one regarding the crime wave and domestic terror, and another on the expansion of individual rights. I believe these are two separate matters. I think all Americans should be very concerned by the crime wave and the increase in these domestic terrorist activities, which have persisted throughout the last 3 years. I say we cannot restore safety exclusively by building more jails and hiring more police officers, we can do that and we should, but we will never truly deal with crime until we solve the causes of crime, which requires uplifting our urban ghettoes by revitalizing the War on Poverty and establishing full employment in this country. Making sure Americans are safe will be one of my top priorities as President, and I actually have a vision to realize this in the long-term.

Regarding Eisenstadt v. Baird I respect the decision of the Supreme Court and I am emphatically in favor of the Equal Rights Amendment. Regarding the Shafer Report I am opposed to the decriminalization of cannabis. I do welcome the appropriate expansion of civil liberties, so long as it is constitutional, which I pledge to uphold as President.

VANCE HARTKE: It is the strength of our American system that we can openly discuss the great changes unfolding around us. It was Thomas Jefferson who wrote: "The earth always belongs to the living generation.” Of course, this transfer from the past to the present must come with a sober discussion to decide together what is right for us while preserving the core values of America.

I believe in the medical consensus that marijuana is too dangerous to decriminalize nationally. Until proven otherwise, I will never consent to the distribution of such a harmful product to the public. In contrast, couples, married or unmarried, should have access to contraceptives. Whether or not to have a child is a decision that the government should not interfere with for two consenting adults. Furthermore, the Equal Rights Amendment should be advanced as a measure to promote equality, along with a package to ensure the protection of older women, whether in social security benefits, alimony, job training, or child custody. Finally, terrorism has no place in America. Those who would resort to violence will face the full force of the law, regardless of their background or motivation.

Quote

3.- If you had to criticize one of the candidates in this primary, who would it be? And why for?

JOHN LINDSAY: Senator Humphrey seemingly wants to be President to satisfy his own ambition rather than to champion the noble for which he once fought.  As Vice President, he passionately defended the Vietnam War as more and more of our boys died for a mistake because Johnson refused to do the right thing and bring our boys home.  Now that the Vietnam War is unpopular, Humphrey claims to have had an epiphany like Paul falling off his horse and realized Vietnam was a mistake.  Of course, he still won’t say whether he’d grant a blanked pardon those who avoided the draft.

Humphrey originally supported busing, then decided he actually opposed it while running in the Florida primary.  Now he says busing should be allowed albeit only used rarely.  Whatever your position on busing is, odds are that he has both supported and opposed it at some point during the campaign.

No matter one’s politics, I think most agree we need a leader who actually stands for something more than their own ambitions.  Senator Humphrey has failed this test time after time.  It’s remarkable how election year opinion polling can apparently do more to change some men’s minds than 40,000 flag-draped coffins.

EUGENE MCCARTHY: While I prefer remaining above petty infighting which often focuses more on personalities than policies, I do feel a duty to express my disappointment with my former colleague, Senator Hartke. When we served in the Senate together, I saw his strong commitment to Civil Rights and opportunity for all Americans. It is for that reason that I cannot fathom why you have chosen to accept the support of Henry Maier, a man who clearly has no respect for his Black constituents in the city of Milwaukee. Milwaukee has some of the most segregated housing and public services in this country outside of the South and this is due, in large part, to Maier’s failed leadership.

He’s shown a complete abdication of leadership in the face of and demand for reform, instead throwing his full weight behind a police department with documented instances of corruption. Henry Maier represents the same kind of dirty, racist, anti-democratic politics Richard Daley conducts in Chicago which we defeated in the last primary contest. It’s this kind of politics that has no place in the Democratic Party and so I ask you, if you wish to commit to expanding Civil Rights, will you condemn his support?

ROBERT BYRD: I will take this opportunity to go after Senator Humphrey. While he has had a long and illustrious career, serving as Vice President, and Senator since 1948, he has changed his position on too many issues as of late to warrant being on this stage. But the Senator supported the Viet-nam War strongly, and has now said he opposes it. He has yet to take a clear stance on bussing, and has a proven record of losing to Richard Nixon. Now is not the time to look back, but rather to look to the future. Hubert had his chance, and he failed. We need consistency, and unfortunately, he has let us down.

SAM YORTY: I fear that Senator Humphrey doesn't have what it takes to combat the radicals and bring this party to victory. He has buckled and shifted with the wind nearly every time a new protestor comes their way. That is not leadership or conviction, that is cowardice. Where was the Senator on busing before the protestors, and why is he silent now? He has voted to weaken and defeat anti-busing protections, including a constitutional amendment I've supported. Now he expects Americans to quickly move on and forget with every new pivot.

Pair this with what we know and don't know. For months, the Senator has refused to answer for his stance on amnesty. The people deserve to know tonight, on the record, Hubert. On other issues, he has capitulated to the peaceniks all too often. Back in January, he called for not only an immediate and total withdrawal from Vietnam, but for sharply reducing our overseas military installations. Not even Mayor Lindsay has publicly gone this far! This is a repudiation of everything Johnson, Kennedy, and even Truman have stood for since the Marshall Plan. We cannot count on Humphrey to contain communism abroad, extremism at home, nor Nixon in November.

HUBERT HUMPHREY: I think the voters, and we as a party, have had enough of the simply vicious attacks in this primary. We are tearing ourselves apart. I certainly expect to be receiving some broadsides tonight, as it comes with the territory of being the leader in public polling, but I'd let to remind my fellow candidates that we are on the same team, that only together will we advance the great cause of Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal. And perhaps most importantly of all, we are all trying to beat President Nixon.

Nixon has mislead the public about the War in Indochina and his agenda has severely divided this nation while leaving the economy in tatters, with persistent unemployment and inflation, all while our streets remain unsafe. We have to defeat him. Make no mistake, President Nixon enjoys every second of our discord and will certainly attack us himself with his machine, but I am optimistic we can beat him, if, and only if, we are together.

VANCE HARTKE: I pledge here and now not to engage in the kind of gutter politics that has so deeply damaged our credibility. I intend instead to represent the truest principles of the Democratic Party—sown by the astute Thomas Jefferson, expanded by the wise Andrew Jackson, refined by the great Franklin D. Roosevelt, and manifested by the late John F. Kennedy—to advance the cause of the common worker, the humble farmer, and the unvarnished dreamer.

Let us have the integrity to end deception and secrecy in government. Let us have the strength to close the chapter on Vietnam. Let us have the ingenuity to eliminate racial and gender discrimination. Let us have the compassion to provide dignified work to the poor and care to the sick. Let us have the awareness to not despoil the only planet we have to live on. Let us have faith in one another that despite our differences we are one family under heaven and as such we are each other's keepers. Let us have the humility to remember that no man or woman by themselves can sustain these principles alone. To the audience here at Wisconsin and beyond, I ask that you lend me your energy.

Lumine:
Debate - Rebuttal and Closing Phase

Quote

4. For the candidates who were attacked on Answer 3 (Humphrey three times, Hartke once), you get to make a 150 word rebuttal to each attack.

Quote

5. The Wisconsin Primary is in a couple of days. What is your closing statement to the voters there? (150 words max.)

You have until Tuesday midnight.

Lumine:
Debate - Second Phase
ATTENDING CANDIDATES: Humphrey, Lindsay, McCarthy, Yorty, Hartke and Byrd

Quote

1.- 4. For the candidates who were attacked on Answer 3 (Humphrey three times, Hartke once), you get to make a 150 word rebuttal to each attack.

HUBERT HUMPHREY: I think it is really truly disgraceful that Mayor Yorty and Mayor Lindsay would seek to mislead the public on me changing my positions or lecture me lack of integrity. I’ll say firstly that yes, my view on the War in Indochina has changed with time, who amongst us hasn't when presented with new facts and new realities, in fact, it is true for most everybody on stage. I want to be a President willing to learn and lead, not an iconoclast.

But most of all, this couldn’t be more hypocritical. Mayor Yorty and Mayor Lindsay both supported President Nixon in 1968. Mayor Lindsay sought the Vice Presidential nomination at the Republican convention in 1968 that ultimately went to Spiro Agnew whose nomination he seconded and Mayor Yorty supported President Nixon in 1968 in the hopes of a cabinet post he did not receive. Mayor Yorty also invokes the name of President Kennedy to critique me, but Mayor Yorty did not even support President Kennedy in 1960. Now both men seek to lead this party against President Nixon? How do they expect to lead this party when they have never demonstrated any loyalty to the party or respect to its voters? How do we expect either Mayor to unite the Democratic Party for November when both seek to tear the party into factions?

These attacks are beyond desperate and cynical, Mayor Lindsay voted for the Tonkin Resolution and now claims to be above the Vietnam issue, and Mayor Yorty who attacks me for wanting to end the arms race while President Nixon, whom he supported, campaigned on the same thing in ’68. I believe Democrats will see through these transparently opportunist attacks from mere politicians who trip and talk over themselves to tear down Democratic leaders just as they slandered Senator Kennedy, stopping at nothing so they can have their moment in the spotlight at the Convention. I don’t want to carve this party up, I want to unite it so we can win, and win with a commanding majority to govern.

VANCE HARTKE: Senator McCarthy, when I denounced the worst instincts in our party, I did not invite you to indulge them! Mr. Maier is one of the most determined mayors in seeking public housing for the needy. No mayor in the history of Milwaukee has been elected with more public support than he has. To smear him with unproven criminal charges is a show of contempt for the everyday Americans who supported him. If he is so repugnant to you, I ask: Why did you support Senator Long over Senator Kennedy for Whip? Why do you condemn Mr. Maier for his support of the police when you are on record as saying “I haven’t got anything against Russell Long” after the events of Chicago in 1968? Are you tired of the accusations? So am I. Leave the pontificating to the poets and get down to the business of statesmanship, my friend.

Quote

5. The Wisconsin Primary is in a couple of days. What is your closing statement to the voters there?

JOHN LINDSAY: America deserves a President whose values don’t change with the political winds.  I joined the Democratic Party because ‘country first’ is more than a slogan to me, but my views and values have remained consistent.  Whether we agree or disagree, every American will always know exactly where I stand and what I stand for!  America needs a President who can see a brighter future and has the courage to fight for it.

America deserves a government that fights for working-class Americans instead of persecuting the unions that advocate for them!  Our boys deserve a government that will never again dishonor their sacrifice by asking them to die for a mistake!  African-Americans deserve a government dedicated to actually enforcing equality under the law!  Our children deserve to breath clean air and walk home from school on clean, safe streets!  Only then will it finally be morning in America!

EUGENE MCCARTHY: Richard Nixon has left a severe blot on the character of this nation. His policies have gutted social programs, incited race hatred and seen over twenty thousand more American boys killed for an illegal war. It is going to take bold, decisive action to steer our country back onto the right track. We have seen the great work that economic programs like Head Start and Medicaid, both of which I assisted in the passage of, have done for our most vulnerable citizens. It is for that reason that we cannot turn back on this progress and we must defend and expand on our record as a party.

I believe if we're going to win in this election, we need someone who has experience getting effective, progressive, legislation passed while also standing up for peace, democracy and human rights and that is what I offer in this primary contest.

ROBERT BYRD: Firstly, I am thankful for the opportunity to speak here tonight. We as a nation are facing a Crisis of Confidence. We are still fighting a war that the Current President said he had a plan to get us out. America's boys are still being shipped to DIE, and yet we still have no plan to get out. We have an uptick in domestic terrorism, rising inflation, and busing, which some of my esteemed opponents are refusing to pick a clear side. We need leadership, and we needed it yesterday! We need to do more for the workers, the poor, the downtrodden, instead of trampling upon them to please the few. Yes, there is a Silent Majority of Americans, but they are not afraid to voice their opinion about our present leadership.

SAM YORTY: Busing is on the ballot. Crime is on the ballot. National security is on the ballot. This all ties into who our party is, and what we will allow it to become. We know what President Nixon wants. I will be your voice to reclaim sanity as the Democratic nominee.

While others may seek to adopt my rhetoric or bend their stances, you cannot mimick conviction. Since my earliest days in the political trenches, I have stood up for labor and the decency of common workers. I have asserted America's role in combating communism and other twisted ideologies, both at home and abroad. I have pushed for new opportunity in lifting the neglected up, just as we have revolutionized Los Angeles in culture and commerce.

America must be ever vigilant, though just as hopeful we will persevere. We will rise up to the occasion in 1972. We will be heard.

HUBERT HUMPHREY: It's true, Americans are tired of politicians pursuing expediency, they are tired of cynicism. Americans deserve an authentic man of principle and conviction, a leader. For all my career I have fought for labor, for public healthcare, for federal farm supports, for civil rights, and for a foreign policy that is capable of realizing when an intervention is no longer in the interest of this country and our Democratic ideals. My fellow Democrats, if you seek a leader, not an opportunist, I am asking for your vote. If you are seeking a regular Democrat who is happy and ready to unite this party and its voters for the New Deal and the Great Society, and who seeks to strengthen the party rather than tear it down in a mad scramble for power, I am asking for your vote. Our voters deserve to be led, not manipulated. I hope to lead.

VANCE HARTKE: Four years of stagnation under the Republican administration must come to an end. We all know that there is no security in war and no prosperity in avoiding domestic decay. Our party is charged with reversing both trends. Such has always been our lot from Hoover to Roosevelt, from Eisenhower to Kennedy, and now from Nixon to one of us on this stage today. It is time then to remember that our heritage allows us to reclaim the mantle of public order with the crusade for equal opportunity. It makes peace a synonym not of weakness but of strength. I fight for these values, and I will never retreat from them.

Lumine:
Debate - Grading
ATTENDING CANDIDATES: Humphrey, Lindsay, McCarthy, Yorty, Hartke and Byrd

Well. New Hampshire was chaos and pandemonium, and likely to have cost the party significant support from the general electorate moving forward. In contrast, Wisconsin proved far more decent while still presenting a clear contrast between the different candidates, as well as further clarity on the lanes they're pursuing. While this may make for less compelling television, it is better received by scores of voters (those who see themselves as very serious people) who don't want the political circus showed right on their faces.

By that same metric, it is also far less decisive, but it provides some interesting effects moving forwards.

Let's get things out of the way with a player by player review:

VANCE HARTKE: Hartke remains the most unknown of the candidates on stage to the general electorate - though it's mostly due to Byrd's previous and higher profile -, but he's getting there at last with Democratic audiences and voters. Despite his original alignment with the party's left, Hartke has been increasingly shedding that caricature to showcase a far more complex - at times puzzling to voters - candidate, capable to appealing to the anti-war left while also making relevant populist inroads into working class voters. This is in full force during much of the debate, with Hartke coming off strong in the first half by being folksy, strong and even memorable, smartly making a play for moderates while not entering the marijuana rabbit hole.

Alas, although it is not crippling, McCarthy wounds. And though Hartke gets the audience to chuckle with the "leave the pontificating to the poets", it is not quite enough. This, in turn, drags him down with African Americans (only 3% of the Wisconsin electorate) and, more importantly, some of the anti-war left crowd that also fuel his coalition.

SAM YORTY: Yorty's back for his second debate in take no prisoners mode, but he is less effective here. Much of it has to deal with the fact that this time he has far stiffer competition, with Byrd, Humphrey and to some extent Hartke all making a play for the voters who, in both NH and IL, have gone with the Mayor partly due to lackluster competition. Thus Yorty faces a steeper hill to climb, and he does well despite it by championing Middle America, standing his ground on crime, and taking Humphrey to task for his record and perceived hypocrisy. And yet it is not enough. A vicious reminder of Yorty's association with Nixon in the past stings, badly, particularly when John Kennedy's (Saint Kennedy) name is brought into the mix. Yorty will consolidate Wallace voters indeed, but will not get to be the star of the night.

JOHN LINDSAY: At long last, Lindsay's night to shine. The Mayor comes out like a Green Beret in Nam', taking no prisoners, going for the jugular, and generally invoking a rabidly positive response among minorities, anti-establishment types and the youth while also repulsing many moderate Democrats. Tough yet inspiring, and perhaps shamelessly populist, Lindsay knows his lane and makes a play for it, constantly outshining a solid and still highly appealing McCarthy. And then he's let loose on ol' Hubert Humphrey. Lindsay proceeds to deliver a thorough eviscerating of the former Vice President, which culminates on the most vicious and memorable line of the debate: "opinion polling can apparently do more to change some men’s minds than 40,000 flag-draped coffins."

And yet, it all almost slips away. Humphrey gives back almost as good as he got, firing right back with Lindsay's high profile journey across the Republican Party that gives many loyal Democrats - and even some in the left - serious reason for pause.

HUBERT HUMPHREY: Having avoided the mess and drama of NH, Humphrey is finally up to bat. He has a record - more so than everybody else on stage - and stands up for it, mixing moderation with reform in a manner that reassures terrified voters (many of which would have to bolt to Yorty in fear of the radical takeover), but which, of course, won't bring back those already predisposed to hate "The Hube". Humphrey avoids major pitfalls, presents himself clearly as a frontrunner, and is set on the road to the first two or three places... until, of course, he becomes a designated target.

Not all attacks on Humphrey are necessarily effective, but they wound and derail momentum. Not only is Humphrey attacked on hypocrisy and flip-flopping, Lindsay's broadside brings back all the painful wounds from the past. Humphrey fires back, and does so far better than Muskie and Kennedy did in NH, dragging Yorty and Lindsay with him while reminding voters why he's been so prominent in the Democratic Party since 1948.

EUGENE MCCARTHY: McCarthy is another newcomer, fresh out of triumph in Illinois. And an interesting dynamic develops during the night: constantly, McCarthy says the right things to inspire all those who stood with him back in 68' and proves himself to be thoughtful, clear on his ideals, and even smart enough to dodge the landmines on the values question. And yet he is persistently upstaged by a more populist Lindsay, who may be less popular among the college students and professors, but who somehow always manages to show more oomph and just the extra bit of energy needed to draw attention away from McCarthy. Nonetheless, it is a solid debate, and had Lindsay been wounded just a bit more, McCarthy may well have prevailed.

ROBERT BYRD: Though not as eloquent or charismatic at the others, many Democrats are surprised by Byrd's performance on stage. In a primary marked by the left's increasing growth, Byrd successfully guns for the middle by saying the stuff that most median voters who rather agree with, and repeatedly comes off as a sensible, if not particularly inspiring, candidate. This, combined with the damage sustained by Yorty and Humphrey, creates a weird scenario in which Byrd is able to sidestep the drama and prove himself attractive to some. Whether that truly translates into future votes, however, is another thing entirely.

-

When the smoke clears, newspapers are clear in stating that the Democratic Party is now fiercely fighting for its soul between the radicals (McCarthy/Lindsay), the rabblerousers (Yorty/Hartke) and the last desperate gasp of the Democratic establishment (Humphrey/Byrd), a battle that only one side can win.

They then narrowly pronounce LINDSAY as the winner even as moderate voters continue to be repelled, the anti-war vote further galvanizing around him as the "40,000 flag draped coffins" is on every newspaper and TV newscast. A combination of MCCARTHY, HARTKE and BYRD, place second or third by narrow margins, generally judged to have had solid nights. Mayor YORTY follows behind, weakened by competition but ultimately not a major loser of the debate. Vice President HUMPRHEY, while anointed the loser of the debate, is given substantial credit by commentators over his performance under fire, with a number of op-eds even suggesting that, in the end, there's an ocean of difference between this "defeat" and the debacle experienced by Muskie on the NH debate stage.

Navigation

[0] Message Index