John F. Kennedy

Presidential And Vice Presidential Candidates: “Shot Gun” Marriages Most Of The Time!

When a Presidential nominee selects his Vice Presidential running mate in any Presidential campaign, it can be regarded as a judgment of the Presidential nominee’s leadership.

It can also cause much grief, as too often, the combination of Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees does not work, whether elected or not.

Since the time of Richard Nixon as Vice President under Dwight D. Eisenhower, as the Vice Presidency has become a significant and powerful office, there has been much distrust, stress, and alienation between the people running for the top two offices, and if elected, has become a major problem that affects the nation.

Witness the following:

While President Eisenhower allowed Vice President Nixon to take on more authority as Eisenhower suffered health crises, the two men never were very close, and Eisenhower held off on backing Nixon publicly for a second term as Vice President in 1956.

Lyndon B. Johnson had very little role and a difficult relationship with President John F. Kennedy, and his brother, Attorney General Robert F.Kennedy.

When Nixon ran against Kennedy in 1960, his running mate, Henry Cabot Lodge, followed a very relaxed campaign strategy, taking long naps and breaks during the Fall campaign, and it was clear that the two men did not get along well.

When Lyndon Johnson chose Hubert Humphrey as his Vice President in 1964, he treated Humphrey in a very disrespectful way, similar to what had occurred to Johnson under Kennedy. Humphrey was ruined in his later Presidential candidacy by having to endorse and support the Vietnam War, a war he had grave doubts about, and was often left out of important cabinet meetings.

When Nixon became President, he looked at his Vice President, Spiro Agnew, in a less than respectful way, and just allowed Agnew to do “dirty work” of attacking liberals and the news media, and refused to keep him informed about many policies, and let him resign due to scandal, without a word of support.

When Nixon chose Gerald Ford after Agnew resigned, he saw him as a lightweight, who would insure his own survival in the Watergate scandal, an assumption that Nixon was totally wrong about!

George McGovern chose Thomas Eagleton in 1972, without any knowledge of his mental treatments and then, effectively abandoned him for Sargent Shriver, a Kennedy brother in law.

Gerald Ford got along well with Nelson Rockefeller as his Vice President, but dropped him in favor of Bob Dole when he ran in 1976, a move that probably caused his defeat.

When Ronald Reagan chose George H. W. Bush in 1980, the two men did not trust each other, and had been major rivals, and although Bush worked hard for Reagan, there was no personal chemistry between them, and the Bushes were never invited to stay at the White House under the Reagan Administration.

Walter Mondale chose Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, without knowing about the illegal activities of her husband, and they did not seem very close during the campaign.

George H. W. Bush did not have much confidence, or give much authority, to his Vice President, Dan Quayle, who was a major burden during his administration, due to Quayle’s blunders and misstatements.

Michael Dukakis and Lloyd Bentsen seemed like oil and water, when they ran together in 1988.

Much the same can be said for Bob Dole and Jack Kemp in the 1996 Presidential campaign.

The combination of Al Gore and Joe Lieberman never seemed to click during the 2000 Presidential campaign, and Lieberman publicly called for giving up the fight for Florida’s electoral votes when Gore was still suing for a recount against George W. Bush.

In 2004, John Kerry and John Edwards did not get along very well, as Edwards was very much his own man in his own mind.

And sadly, the same holds true for John McCain and Sarah Palin, with her becoming a major headache, embarrassment, and burden in 2008.

The only times running mates really seemed to work well together were:

Hubert Humphrey and Edmund Muskie in the 1968 campaign.

Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale in the Carter Presidency, with Mondale practically seen as co-President.

Bill Clinton and Al Gore in the Clinton Presidency, until the time of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, when there was a falling out between the two men, which affected the 2000 Presidential campaign.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in the second Bush Presidency, although their relationship started to deteriorate in the second term.

Barack Obama and Joe Biden, presently, in the Obama Presidency, working very well together, as united as Carter and Mondale were in the 1970s

This is all discussed as reality in our history as Mitt Romney edges closer to the Presidential nomination of his party.

And even if, somehow, Rick Santorum, or someone else ends up as the Republican nominee, who is chosen to be his Vice Presidential running mate will be crucial to the campaign, and if he wins, to the office of Vice President, and to the nation.

Ranking Presidents Affected By Being A One Term Or Two Term President?

The game of ranking Presidents is a continuous topic among historians, political scientists, journalists, and ordinary citizens.

In the upcoming June issue of Presidential Studies Quarterly, Professor Curt Nichols, an assistant professor of political science at Baylor University in Texas, comes up with a new theory and premise about how Presidents are ultimately ranked in history.

Nichols used a statistical method known as regression analysis, utilizing Presidential ranking polls conducted by C Span, the Wall Street Journal, and the Siena Research Institute.

Each poll has different factors in judging Presidential leadership, with C Span having ten.

But Nichols says the rating score of Presidents is ultimately raised if the following six factors are considered:

Number of years served
Wartime leadership
If transformation of political landscape occurs in their term
If they are part of the Founding Fathers group
If they are considered “progressive” and pursue “equal justice for all”
If they are assassinated progressives

At the same time, two factors will decrease the rating scores of Presidents:

If the President is impeached, resigns, or has major political scandals during his administration
If they push the nation into political crisis or are unable to lift the country out of a political crisis

Going by this discussion, Nichols believes that IF Barack Obama is defeated for re-election, he will rank only as “average”, as number 22, between William McKinley and George H. W. Bush.

But Nichols also believes that If Barack Obama is re-elected to the Presidency, he could end up as high as number FOUR, behind Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George Washington, and ahead of Thomas Jefferson!

There is lots of room for debate on the Nichols viewpoint, but it certainly will cause much more discussion and analysis of the men who have been President of the United States.

A few observations here:

If wartime Presidents have an edge, then why is James Madison, William McKinley, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush rated quite low on the rankings list generally accepted?

One term Presidencies that stick out as better include James K. Polk and John F. Kennedy.

Two term Presidencies that are seen negatively include James Madison, Ulysses Grant, Grover Cleveland, and George W. Bush.

So whether having a second term really helps raise the stature of a President is still very debatable.

And whether Barack Obama could end up ranked ahead of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton is something that will be hotly debated into the long term future.

Barack Obama Advice From Yogi Berra: “It Ain’t Over Till It’s Over”!

There will be the tendency for Barack Obama supporters to feel good after Super Tuesday, and feel that Barack Obama has a second term in the White House in the bag.

That would be the worst assumption possible!

On paper, yes, things are looking good as the GOP race for the Presidential nomination continues, and Mitt Romney looks in trouble, and Rick Santorum, who most logical people cannot see having any chance to win the nomination or election, continues to do well, particularly in the heartland of the nation.

Eight months to go until the election, and the world can turn upside down and inside out, in less than that amount of time.

We could have a major war in the Middle East against Iran, or another economic downturn, which could be triggered by that war with Iran.

Unforeseen circumstances we cannot imagine could occur, and the tides could turn.

Remember that Thomas E. Dewey was ahead of Harry Truman in 1948; Richard Nixon ahead of John F. Kennedy in 1960; Jimmy Carter ahead of Ronald Reagan in 1980; Michael Dukakis ahead of George H. W. Bush in 1988; George H. W. Bush ahead of Bill Clinton in 1992; and Al Gore ahead of George W. Bush in 2000 to the end, but not considering the electoral vote issue that would help Bush in the end.

There is plenty of work ahead for the Obama team, and they cannot afford to be cocky.

They need to remember the admonition of Yankee great, catcher Yogi Berra, who is famous for his line about baseball games: “It ain’t over till it’s over”!

No more true statement can be expressed regarding politics, as well as sports!

Mitt Romney, Gutless Wonder: Refusal To Stand Up Against “Crazy” Rick Santorum Proves He Would Be Weak President!

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has proved to be a “gutless wonder”, unwilling to stand up against “Crazy” Rick Santorum, and if he cannot do this, what kind of a President would he be? How could we believe that he would fight against right wing extremism, or stand up to foreign nations, or believe anything that comes out of his mouth? He would lack all credibility in the White House!

Mitt Romney has shown he has no principles, no core, no stands he will not back down on if put under pressure!

This is not the kind of leadership that America needs in troubled times. He has not convinced America or his party that he cannot be pushed around, and that is totally scary and troubling at the same time.

If he cannot condemn Rick Santorum for saying that promoting college education for young people is a sign of snobbery; if he cannot stop being petty in advocating that “Big Bird” and PBS being cut from government support (a miniscule amount of money) as a reaction to what Santorum is saying, trying to outdo him in the attack on education; if Romney is unable to speak up for separation of church and state, as he himself is from a minority religion in America as a Mormon, just as John F. Kennedy was a Catholic; and if Romney cannot look us in the eye and say he wishes to govern as a moderate centrist, the only way to govern, rather than a hard line right wing conservative against his entire history, then Mitt Romney should not be President, and were he so, he would be a disaster in the White House!

The answer is to wish that Rick Santorum is the nominee, is walloped by Barack Obama, and that defeat would force the extremists out of the Republican Party, and allow the mainstream moderate center to reclaim control of the party of Lincoln, TR, Ike and even Reagan, to return to sanity and a future where Americans could again trust the GOP with national power in the White House and Congress! The only fear about asserting this is the concern that IF some tremendous economic or foreign policy crisis arises in the eight months to the election, that Americans might be crazy enough to vote in a right wing extremist, Rick Santorum, in a moment of fear and emotion. If that were to happen, then all faith in the common sense of the American people will have been lost, and we will be in deeper trouble than we have ever been in our entire history!

Rick Santorum: Angry, Pessimistic, Intrusive Into Personal Lives, And No Ronald Reagan!

Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum represents angry, pessimistic Tea Party mentality; hating government; hating educated people; hating the world outside America; wishing to dominate women’s lives;wanting to promote hard line Christian theology on Americans; trying to enforce a Puritan standard on personal behavior; rejecting privacy rights on social matters; invoking Satan as no other Presidential candidate ever has.

All of the above is said to be continuing the heritage and tradition and example of Ronald Reagan, but that is a total lie, as Ronald Reagan was optimistic; had a sunny disposition; avoided social conservatism except in rhetoric; hardly ever attended church; understood the need for government and taxation despite his rhetoric; knew how to work with the opposition, as for instance, Speaker of the House Thomas “Tip” O’Neill on Social Security reform; and worked to promote the end of nuclear weapons despite an earlier hawkish viewpoint of foreign policy.

Rick Santorum could not ever be as presidential as Ronald Reagan, with all of his faults recognized. Ronald Reagan was a comparative giant, while Rick Santorum could not stand in his shoes.

Rick Santorum has no respect for the office of the Presidency, with his sharp attacks on a revered President, John F. Kennedy, who understood the sensitivity of being Catholic, and advocated separation of church and state, instead of promoting theocracy as Rick Santorum does.

What kind of President would condemn parents who would wish their children to attend college, when the unemployment rate for educated people is half of what it is for those who have not attended college or some kind of community college or training program? Should not President Barack Obama want to promote that? What is wrong with Rick Santorum?

Any sane person would have to wonder whether Rick Santorum is having a mental breakdown, as NEVER has there been any candidate for the Presidency so negative, so destructive in his assertions, in living memory. Rick Santorum is a good argument for psychological testing of all Presidential candidates, as we can ill afford to have a mentally deranged person in the White House!

Rick Santorum Declares War On Two Democratic Presidents: John F. Kennedy And Barack Obama!

Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum continues to rampage in his “cultural war” against liberals, progressives, and the Democratic Party.

He seems not to understand that what he is doing is political suicide, and if he is selected as the Republican nominee for President, a disaster awaits the party.

Establishment Republicans realize this, and can only hope that Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts Governor, can stop Santorum’s ascent in the 14 primaries coming up in the next eight days.

Santorum is stopping at nothing, not only attacking President Barack Obama, but also President John F. Kennedy.

Santorum continued his attack this past weekend on Barack Obama as an elitist, and a snob, for promoting higher education for all young people, continuing to assert that Obama is trying to poison the minds of young people, making them liberal and hating religion, and promoting indoctrination.

And he has attacked Kennedy’s declaration of the absolute separation of church and state that Kennedy uttered during the Presidential campaign of 1960, stating that religion should be part of government as the Founding Fathers intended, except for the fact that they were very clear in agreeing with Kennedy’s statement that religion and politics should not mix.

Santorum seems to be totally out of control, and one can wonder whether he has ever been able to accept those who disagree with him, as he still does not have even one US Senator and only three House members from Pennsylvania willing to endorse him.

The theocracy he is promoting will not be accepted by the American people, and hopefully, Republican primary voters will realize the dangers he presents and repudiate him finally, and send him back to Pennsylvania, where he should be, helping his poor wife and older children take care of his very sick three year old daughter, instead of pontificating on what he calls the “truth”, which is totally false!

The “family values” candidate needs to focus on his own family, and stop pursuing his ego that he is qualified and acceptable to be the President of the United States, which he most certainly is not. There is no way that he could ever unite the American people in any fashion!

A Forecast Of The Future? Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley Vs. Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell

Yesterday, the political website POLITICO sponsored a debate between Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley and Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell over the controversial social issues that have come to the forefront in the past few weeks.

Martin O’Malley came to the strong defense of President Barack Obama, and hailed the successes of the administration, while being critical of the Republicans, led by Virginia’s Governor Bob McDonnell, who became embroiled in a controversy over an invasive vaginal ultra sound bill to undermine abortions by women.

O’Malley at the same time defended the decision in Maryland to make that state the eighth state to legalize gay marriages.

Bob McDonnell was on the defensive, as he explained his change of heart on the invasive ultra sound bill, after much outrage by women and the news media and others who believe in the right of privacy and women’s rights.

As one watched this debate, one could imagine the scenario of a possible 2016 Presidential debate between the two men, governors of neighboring states, with totally opposite views, and both strong defenders of their viewpoints.

Martin O’Malley is already seen as a top tier Presidential candidate for 2016 in the Democratic Party, and Bob McDonnell has obvious ambitions on the Republican side, and has made it clear that he is interested in a Vice Presidential slot with Mitt Romney, if Romney were to choose him. That is the obvious, although denied, reason for his backing off on the invasive ultra sound bill that he seemed ready to sign.

O’Malley has showed evidence that he would be a hard, aggressive campaigner if he ran for President, as he has become one of the major defenders of President Obama’s record, and a critic of the governors of not only Virginia, but also Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida, all hard line conservatives, who he accuses correctly of presiding over very poor employment growth, while Obama, by intervening in Michigan and other Midwestern states, has promoted a revival of the auto industry and the general economy, along with the general progress in decline of the unemployment rate.

Not only is Martin O’Malley demonstrating that a Catholic can have an open mind on issues such as abortion and gay marriage and labor rights, but also Andrew Cuomo, Governor of New York, is showing the same on these issues, and both are certainly to be considered front runners for the Presidential nomination in 2016.

Not all Catholic politicians allow their faith to dominate their politics, although Rick Santorum, particularly, and convert Newt Gingrich, both seem to feel that their religious views should be dictated to the population at large, even though we were founded as a nation on the concept of separation of church and state, which John F. Kennedy so clearly enunciated as the first Catholic President of the United States!

Speculation About Reported Alliance Between Mitt Romney And Ron Paul: Could It Lead To Rand Paul Being Vice Presidential Running Mate Of Romney?

Political pundits, including Joe Scarborough of MORNING JOE on MSNBC, have noticed what seems like a warm friendship between two Republican Presidential candidates, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and Texas Congressman Ron Paul.

It has become obvious that Ron Paul has spent a lot of money on attack ads in various states against Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, and now Rick Santorum, as each has become a major challenger to Mitt Romney. He has also attacked them on debate stages, as he did last night against Rick Santorum.

This seems very weird to many observers, as Mitt Romney is not a libertarian or a believer in the withdrawal of America’s involvement overseas, which Ron Paul stands for.

And Ron Paul is too old to be considered as a running mate, but then it is recognized that his son, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, who is 49 years old, has already said he would be honored to be considered for Vice President, a very strong hint that a deal could be struck to put Rand Paul in the Vice Presidential slot as a way to unite diverse elements of the GOP for November.

In many ways, it would be a “shotgun marriage”, but not the first in American history, as for instance, the team of Franklin D. Roosevelt and John Nance Garner in 1932; the team of Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard Nixon in 1952; the team of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson in 1960; and the team of Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush in 1980, were not based on close friendship or ties between the Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees. They were done for maximum political advantage.

The problem with this possibility of Mitt Romney teaming with Rand Paul is that it puts Rand Paul and his extremist libertarian philosophy a potential heartbeat away from the Presidency, although the positive side for Romney is that it makes a Libertarian Party challenger less likely or, at least, less able to draw away votes if there is one, such as former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. Ron Paul has a lot of supporters, who could be drawn to support Mitt Romney, if he selected Rand Paul.

So this new rumor makes one think that it could be a way to help Romney clinch the nomination and have somewhat united support, but the thought of a possible President Rand Paul would be a radical change unacceptable to mainstream and centrist political attitudes.

Presidential Communication: Essential But Not Always Present

As this race for President wears on, it is more obvious than ever that the ability of a President to communicate with the general public is a major factor in promoting success, and that some Presidents, but not a majority, have been exceptional in displaying Presidential communication skills.

Presidents who have shown the communications skills that are urgent to possess include:

Theodore Roosevelt
Woodrow Wilson
Franklin D. Roosevelt
John F. Kennedy
Ronald Reagan
Bill Clinton
Barack Obama

The other Presidents, in one degree or another, lacked these skills and no matter how successful they may have been in accomplishing their goals, they tend to rank lower in the public mind.

President Vs. President In Presidential Elections: 14 Times and 20 Presidents

On George Washington’s actual birthday, 280 years ago (1732), it is appropriate to ask how many times has there been a Presidential election in which two Presidents opposed each other?

The answer is 14 times, and a total of 20 Presidents have competed against a fellow Oval Office occupant, present or future!

Here are the details:

Presidential Elections of 1796 and 1800–John Adams vs Thomas Jefferson, with Adams first winning, and then Jefferson.

Presidential Elections Of 1824 and 1828–John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson, with Adams first winning (even though behind Jackson in popular votes), and then Jackson.

Presidential Elections of 1836 and 1840–Martin Van Buren vs William Henry Harrison, with Van Buren first winning, and then Harrison.

Presidential Elections of 1888 and 1892–Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland, with Harrison first winning (even though behind Cleveland in popular votes), and then Cleveland.

Presidential Election Of 1912–the only time three Presidents, past, present and future, ran against each other, with Woodrow Wilson defeating President William Howard Taft and former President Theodore Roosevelt (running on a third party line, the Progressive Party).

Presidential Election of 1932–Herbert Hoover vs Franklin D. Roosevelt, with FDR winning.

Presidential Election of 1960–John F. Kennedy vs Richard Nixon, with JFK winning, but Nixon later winning the Presidency in 1968.

Presidential Election of 1976–Jimmy Carter vs Gerald Ford, with Carter defeating President Ford.

Presidential Election of 1980–President Jimmy Carter vs Ronald Reagan, with Reagan defeating President Carter.

Presidential Election Of 1992–President George H. W. Bush vs Bill Clinton, with Clinton defeating President Bush.

Of these 20 Presidents, only Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton–a total of five–never lost to their Presidential competitor, although it could be pointed out that FDR lost the Vice Presidency in 1920, a race that Warren G. Harding won for the White House, and that Ronald Reagan lost the Republican nomination for President to Gerald Ford in 1976!

So another trivia contest for those who are interested!