It'll be fascinating to see how this period of America will be studied 50 years from now. We can look back on 1968 with a level of objectivity and say, "Of course the public should have a say in candidates. Of course civil rights matter. How were these concepts ever in question?" What will the "Wtf were they thinking back then??" moments be in the 2080 history (e)books?
Love your question. I think they will marvel about how excited we are to get a second chance to elect the first woman President, that we ever elected an obviously unqualified conman in the first place and then tried to re-elect him after he became a felon, and that we were on the wrong side of the war in Gaza.
Thank you for historically framing the Vietnam and Gaza protests. I hadn’t compared them that way in my mind. I am now very concerned about the police inciting violence.
My joy over the candidates has been tempered by our support of Netanyahu. Now I’m holding my breath waiting to see how the conflict plays out at the convention.
Where do we start? I still feel like this whole election process and happenings in the past year are surreal. I’ll just leave it at that. But good observation.
"Where do we start?" is such a good question! Is there a path to legislate how political parties nominate candidates, and would that be on the state or federal level? Would really love Sharon's take on this.
I was talking with my friend this past weekend about third party candidates, basically running down that because A) almost every state is winner takes all, then B) to get any electoral votes at all a third party candidate would need to win an entire state outright. But then because A) there's a threshold for electoral votes to clinch an election, then B) if a third party candidate wins enough electoral votes then no one wins the election. So then because A) the House of Representatives gets to pick the President, then B) we are *definitely* not getting a third party President. And heaven forbid the House vote be tied, because then the Senate gets to pick between President Vance and President Walz.
Of course, this all comes AFTER the primary process of voting for delegates, not candidates (and I wonder if anyone else remembers the murmurings in 2016 that the RNC was not actually *obligated* to nominate Trump, even if he won the primary?) So at some point the question must be asked, "Are we ready to reconsider some of these processes???"
Regarding the 3rd party scenario -- one thing to keep in mind is that if/when a vote would be pushed to the House, it is not 'one-rep-one-vote.' Rather, each state's delegation gets 1-vote (50 states = 50 votes.) So...not 435 members = 435 votes.
I don't think there is ANY possibility of a tie in the House. IF the House choosing the president becomes a reality, they will choose the Republican candidate. At least in our current era.
I was curious about how things would shake out with a one-vote-per-state rule, and (assuming that each state's vote would simply swing for the majority in that state): there are 27 states with majority Republican reps, 21 states with majority Democratic reps, and 2 states with an even split (MN and NC).
I usually don't bother much with the conventions. I don't need much time to make up my mind about voting, especially this year! It's Harris/Walz for me. But as this year is a real turning point in American History, I will watch.
I was 18 in 1968, immature, ignorant of politics, the civil rights movement, and even the Vietnam War, and paid no attention to the Chicago convention then. Thank you for the History lesson Sharon, although I did finally catch up with the period! Today, my passion is being a student of history.
In 2016 I voted for Hillary Clinton after a lifetime of voting republican. The thing that swayed me the most was watching the two conventions for the first time. When people tell you who they are, believe them. I saw more of my values reflected in the DNC and was pretty much horrified by the RNC. Thank you for the encouragement that change to our electoral process is still possible. I will definitely be watching this week. One question: what if we didn't have parties? Just a range of candidates? Dumb idea?
The comment that surprised me was “LBJ secretly hoped the Democrats would want to renominate him.” Did LBJ regret stepping aside or what is the story there? Fascinating stuff especially how the primaries really took off as a result.
I watched the Republican national conference so I feel I should watch the democrats. I am hoping for a more upbeat, less doom and gloom bunch of speeches this time.
One of the things that’s most fascinating to me about the 1968 Chicago convention is that the fighting and protesting was mostly *within* the Democratic Party. I think we often think it was right vs left and maybe sure it was a little, but Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic Party were the ones who got the Civil Rights Act of 1965 across the finish line and massively remade (made?) our welfare system. While I don’t condone violence, it’s an interesting reminder that if we choose to participate within a political party, we still can disagree with and challenge the party to do better.
(The 2016 Democratic Convention is seared in my brain, particularly Bill Clinton’s speech…because it was on the screen in my DC hospital room when I gave birth to one of my kids. No more conventions for me!)
As the saying goes, “history doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” At age 75, I remember watching the news at the time, and the violent clashes and Dan Rather getting punched are what stand out in my memory. Certainly hoping that the protests are lawful and peaceful and the policing is appropriate, although Chicago police do not have the best track record dealing with protests. The Illinois National has also been deployed to assist, so hoping there is appropriate coordination on that front.
I’ll be watching the convention with an eye to the history being made and to the policies and platform being articulated. Also looking forward to hearing from social media creators on the scene reporting their experiences and interactions on Instagram.
I plan to watch some of the convention, esp Harris’ and Walz’ speeches. (The video of Dan Rather getting punched out is included in his life documentary simply titled “Rather” now streaming on Netflix. It is extremely interesting.)
I’m hoping that Jenna @smarthernews will be doing a final night “watch party” like she did for the final night of the RNC. It was an easy way to watch and ask questions in the chat and to see other people’s perspectives on the speakers and their speeches. I’ll catch the highlights of the other nights because I just don’t have time for all of it.
"...heads of the parties in each state were choosing the presidential nominees in smoke-filled, secret, back room meetings."
In some ways it feels like that still happens, only now it's the super pacs & billionaires influencing and moving the show in the shadows. I remember my parents talking about how the country was "going to hell" and being quietly concerned, not really understanding what that meant at the time (I was only a few days old after all😂).
I will be watching the highlights as I want to hear the Harris platform & plans to pay for it. It has been, and will continue to be, an interesting election cycle. I'm trying to view it as an exciting and forever interesting part of history, but man I can't wait 'til it's over.
I was a young teenager in 1968. I remember bits and pieces of the riots. I’m praying that riots like that do not happen this time & that outside agitators don’t interrupt the peaceful protests. Innocent people could be hurt. It could also hurt the momentum of the Harris/Walz campaign. I will be watching the convention. I’m retired and have the time to do that.
I was ten when the 1968 DNC convention happened. Because I was more interested in watching Dark Shadows when I got home from school I did my homework after dinner when the news was on and missed it all. I do remember my dad actively supporting Richard Nixon and not being a fan of either LBJ or Humphrey. I am pretty certain I had no real knowledge of any changes in the voting process when I would cast my very first vote for President eight years later. I always find interesting tidbits that escaped my notice during the actual time they happened in your work. I will be curious to see how my grandchildren will look back on this particular time in history and what they will remember. So much eludes us during our growing up years. Each of them will be receiving your book from Mins, whether they can read it yet or not. 🙂
Until this year when you discussed primaries on Instagram I didn't actually know how primaries worked. We take so many things for granted because they've 'always been this way' when sometimes they have indeed not always been that way. I don't usually watch conventions. I prefer to read articles or information that the DNC/RNC prints with highlights, policy positions, etc.
One clarification: The protesters gathered in Grant Park not Lincoln Park. This put them on Michigan Avenue, directly across the street from the Hilton Hotel, where the campaign headquarters for Humphrey and McCarthy were located and many of the conventioneers were staying.
It'll be fascinating to see how this period of America will be studied 50 years from now. We can look back on 1968 with a level of objectivity and say, "Of course the public should have a say in candidates. Of course civil rights matter. How were these concepts ever in question?" What will the "Wtf were they thinking back then??" moments be in the 2080 history (e)books?
Love your question. I think they will marvel about how excited we are to get a second chance to elect the first woman President, that we ever elected an obviously unqualified conman in the first place and then tried to re-elect him after he became a felon, and that we were on the wrong side of the war in Gaza.
Thank you for historically framing the Vietnam and Gaza protests. I hadn’t compared them that way in my mind. I am now very concerned about the police inciting violence.
My joy over the candidates has been tempered by our support of Netanyahu. Now I’m holding my breath waiting to see how the conflict plays out at the convention.
Where do we start? I still feel like this whole election process and happenings in the past year are surreal. I’ll just leave it at that. But good observation.
"Where do we start?" is such a good question! Is there a path to legislate how political parties nominate candidates, and would that be on the state or federal level? Would really love Sharon's take on this.
I was talking with my friend this past weekend about third party candidates, basically running down that because A) almost every state is winner takes all, then B) to get any electoral votes at all a third party candidate would need to win an entire state outright. But then because A) there's a threshold for electoral votes to clinch an election, then B) if a third party candidate wins enough electoral votes then no one wins the election. So then because A) the House of Representatives gets to pick the President, then B) we are *definitely* not getting a third party President. And heaven forbid the House vote be tied, because then the Senate gets to pick between President Vance and President Walz.
Of course, this all comes AFTER the primary process of voting for delegates, not candidates (and I wonder if anyone else remembers the murmurings in 2016 that the RNC was not actually *obligated* to nominate Trump, even if he won the primary?) So at some point the question must be asked, "Are we ready to reconsider some of these processes???"
Regarding the 3rd party scenario -- one thing to keep in mind is that if/when a vote would be pushed to the House, it is not 'one-rep-one-vote.' Rather, each state's delegation gets 1-vote (50 states = 50 votes.) So...not 435 members = 435 votes.
Yes, thank you for adding this! It's what makes a House tie vote even a possibility.
I don't think there is ANY possibility of a tie in the House. IF the House choosing the president becomes a reality, they will choose the Republican candidate. At least in our current era.
I was curious about how things would shake out with a one-vote-per-state rule, and (assuming that each state's vote would simply swing for the majority in that state): there are 27 states with majority Republican reps, 21 states with majority Democratic reps, and 2 states with an even split (MN and NC).
I agree with your comment , but I just couldn’t make myself. Like it.
I usually don't bother much with the conventions. I don't need much time to make up my mind about voting, especially this year! It's Harris/Walz for me. But as this year is a real turning point in American History, I will watch.
I was 18 in 1968, immature, ignorant of politics, the civil rights movement, and even the Vietnam War, and paid no attention to the Chicago convention then. Thank you for the History lesson Sharon, although I did finally catch up with the period! Today, my passion is being a student of history.
In 2016 I voted for Hillary Clinton after a lifetime of voting republican. The thing that swayed me the most was watching the two conventions for the first time. When people tell you who they are, believe them. I saw more of my values reflected in the DNC and was pretty much horrified by the RNC. Thank you for the encouragement that change to our electoral process is still possible. I will definitely be watching this week. One question: what if we didn't have parties? Just a range of candidates? Dumb idea?
The comment that surprised me was “LBJ secretly hoped the Democrats would want to renominate him.” Did LBJ regret stepping aside or what is the story there? Fascinating stuff especially how the primaries really took off as a result.
I watched the Republican national conference so I feel I should watch the democrats. I am hoping for a more upbeat, less doom and gloom bunch of speeches this time.
One of the things that’s most fascinating to me about the 1968 Chicago convention is that the fighting and protesting was mostly *within* the Democratic Party. I think we often think it was right vs left and maybe sure it was a little, but Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic Party were the ones who got the Civil Rights Act of 1965 across the finish line and massively remade (made?) our welfare system. While I don’t condone violence, it’s an interesting reminder that if we choose to participate within a political party, we still can disagree with and challenge the party to do better.
(The 2016 Democratic Convention is seared in my brain, particularly Bill Clinton’s speech…because it was on the screen in my DC hospital room when I gave birth to one of my kids. No more conventions for me!)
As the saying goes, “history doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” At age 75, I remember watching the news at the time, and the violent clashes and Dan Rather getting punched are what stand out in my memory. Certainly hoping that the protests are lawful and peaceful and the policing is appropriate, although Chicago police do not have the best track record dealing with protests. The Illinois National has also been deployed to assist, so hoping there is appropriate coordination on that front.
I’ll be watching the convention with an eye to the history being made and to the policies and platform being articulated. Also looking forward to hearing from social media creators on the scene reporting their experiences and interactions on Instagram.
I plan to watch some of the convention, esp Harris’ and Walz’ speeches. (The video of Dan Rather getting punched out is included in his life documentary simply titled “Rather” now streaming on Netflix. It is extremely interesting.)
I’m hoping that Jenna @smarthernews will be doing a final night “watch party” like she did for the final night of the RNC. It was an easy way to watch and ask questions in the chat and to see other people’s perspectives on the speakers and their speeches. I’ll catch the highlights of the other nights because I just don’t have time for all of it.
Here’s the video of Dan Rather getting roughed up by security: https://danratherjournalist.org/about-dan/controversies/punched-1968-dnc/video-1968-democratic-national-convention
"...heads of the parties in each state were choosing the presidential nominees in smoke-filled, secret, back room meetings."
In some ways it feels like that still happens, only now it's the super pacs & billionaires influencing and moving the show in the shadows. I remember my parents talking about how the country was "going to hell" and being quietly concerned, not really understanding what that meant at the time (I was only a few days old after all😂).
I will be watching the highlights as I want to hear the Harris platform & plans to pay for it. It has been, and will continue to be, an interesting election cycle. I'm trying to view it as an exciting and forever interesting part of history, but man I can't wait 'til it's over.
I was a young teenager in 1968. I remember bits and pieces of the riots. I’m praying that riots like that do not happen this time & that outside agitators don’t interrupt the peaceful protests. Innocent people could be hurt. It could also hurt the momentum of the Harris/Walz campaign. I will be watching the convention. I’m retired and have the time to do that.
I was ten when the 1968 DNC convention happened. Because I was more interested in watching Dark Shadows when I got home from school I did my homework after dinner when the news was on and missed it all. I do remember my dad actively supporting Richard Nixon and not being a fan of either LBJ or Humphrey. I am pretty certain I had no real knowledge of any changes in the voting process when I would cast my very first vote for President eight years later. I always find interesting tidbits that escaped my notice during the actual time they happened in your work. I will be curious to see how my grandchildren will look back on this particular time in history and what they will remember. So much eludes us during our growing up years. Each of them will be receiving your book from Mins, whether they can read it yet or not. 🙂
Until this year when you discussed primaries on Instagram I didn't actually know how primaries worked. We take so many things for granted because they've 'always been this way' when sometimes they have indeed not always been that way. I don't usually watch conventions. I prefer to read articles or information that the DNC/RNC prints with highlights, policy positions, etc.
One clarification: The protesters gathered in Grant Park not Lincoln Park. This put them on Michigan Avenue, directly across the street from the Hilton Hotel, where the campaign headquarters for Humphrey and McCarthy were located and many of the conventioneers were staying.
Grant Park makes more sense. Lincoln Park the neighborhood is several miles from where the convention was being held
The parallels 🤯