| Line 18: |
Line 18: |
| | }} | | }} |
| | | | |
| − | '''Walter Frederick Mondale''' (born January 5, 1928) is a former [[United States Senate|U.S. Senator]] from [[Minnesota]] who served as [[Vice President of the United States|vice president]] under [[U.S. President]] [[Jimmy Carter]] from 1977 to 1981.<ref>''Fandex'', Workman Publishing, 2002.</ref> In 1984, as the former vice president, Mondale was the [[Democratic Party]] nominee for President. An avowed [[liberal]], Mondale was defeated by the incumbent [[Ronald Reagan]]. Mondale carried only his home state and the [[District of Columbia]]. He is the only person in history to have lost a statewide election as the nominee of a major party in all fifty states, having lost the 2002 senatorial election in Minnesota and the 1984 presidential election in the other forty-nine. [[Image:Mondale84.jpg|thumb|325px]] | + | '''Walter Frederick Mondale''' (born January 5, 1928) is a former [[United States Senate|U.S. Senator]] from [[Minnesota]] who served as [[Vice President of the United States|vice president]] under [[U.S. President]] [[Jimmy Carter]] from 1977 to 1981.<ref>''Fandex'', Workman Publishing, 2002.</ref> In 1984, as the former vice president, Mondale was the [[Democratic Party]] nominee for President. An avowed [[liberal]], Mondale was defeated by the incumbent [[Ronald Reagan]]. Mondale carried only his home state and the [[District of Columbia]]. He is the only person in history to have lost a statewide election as the nominee of a major party in all fifty states, having lost the 2002 senatorial election in Minnesota and the 1984 presidential election in the other forty-nine. |
| | | | |
| | ==Secular humanist== | | ==Secular humanist== |
| Line 39: |
Line 39: |
| | | | |
| | ==1984 presidential election== | | ==1984 presidential election== |
| − | [[Image:Liberal1984.jpg|thumb|left]] | + | [[Image:Mondale84.jpg|thumb|225px]] |
| | ===Primary and convention rules=== | | ===Primary and convention rules=== |
| | After [[Ted Kennedy]]'s [[primary]] challenge and [[President Carter]]'s loss to Reagan in 1980, Democrats rewrote their nominating and convention procedures for the fourth time in twelve years<ref>See Broder, below.</ref>. Anticipating a two-way contest in 1984 between Sen. Kennedy and former Vice President [[Walter Mondale]]<ref>Bad blood existed between the Humphrey-Mondale and Kennedy machines going back to [[Hubert Humphrey]]'s 1960 Presidential primary campaign. Humphrey later wrote of the [[Massachusetts liberal|Kennedy machine]], "underneath the beautiful exterior there was an element of ruthlessness and toughness I had trouble either accepting or forgetting."</ref>, the original point of contention between them was over bound delegates which Sen. Kennedy wanted to loosen, while the Mondale machine wanted a candidate to be able to go so far as to replace a "disloyal delegate"<ref>[http://academic.regis.edu/jriley/413%20democratic_party_convention_rule.htm Democratic party convention rule changes]. academic.regis.edu . Delegates must march in lockstep.</ref>. | | After [[Ted Kennedy]]'s [[primary]] challenge and [[President Carter]]'s loss to Reagan in 1980, Democrats rewrote their nominating and convention procedures for the fourth time in twelve years<ref>See Broder, below.</ref>. Anticipating a two-way contest in 1984 between Sen. Kennedy and former Vice President [[Walter Mondale]]<ref>Bad blood existed between the Humphrey-Mondale and Kennedy machines going back to [[Hubert Humphrey]]'s 1960 Presidential primary campaign. Humphrey later wrote of the [[Massachusetts liberal|Kennedy machine]], "underneath the beautiful exterior there was an element of ruthlessness and toughness I had trouble either accepting or forgetting."</ref>, the original point of contention between them was over bound delegates which Sen. Kennedy wanted to loosen, while the Mondale machine wanted a candidate to be able to go so far as to replace a "disloyal delegate"<ref>[http://academic.regis.edu/jriley/413%20democratic_party_convention_rule.htm Democratic party convention rule changes]. academic.regis.edu . Delegates must march in lockstep.</ref>. |
| Line 48: |
Line 48: |
| | | | |
| | The winner-take-all rules had the embarrassing affect in 1984 of allowing an insurgent candidate to rack up big delegate wins in late primary states<ref>Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process, Chapter 1 [http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/press/books/1/1/reformingthepresidentialnominationprocess/reformingthepresidentialnominationprocess_chapter.pdf Choosing Presidential Candidates], Steven S. Smith & Melanie J. Springer, eds., Brookings Institute, 2009, pp. 4-8. www.brookings.edu . An excellent and timely synopsis.</ref>. So after 1984 the party brought back "proportional allocation"<ref>This had the consequence in Democratically controlled states, after the [[Bush v. Gore|2000 Florida Recount]] and calls to abolish the [[Electoral College]], for party bosses to explain ''why'' winner-take-all is more beneficial to the state and that "proportional allocation" is a "feel-good" measure that has the effect of cancelling out votes within the same party and state.</ref>. | | The winner-take-all rules had the embarrassing affect in 1984 of allowing an insurgent candidate to rack up big delegate wins in late primary states<ref>Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process, Chapter 1 [http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/press/books/1/1/reformingthepresidentialnominationprocess/reformingthepresidentialnominationprocess_chapter.pdf Choosing Presidential Candidates], Steven S. Smith & Melanie J. Springer, eds., Brookings Institute, 2009, pp. 4-8. www.brookings.edu . An excellent and timely synopsis.</ref>. So after 1984 the party brought back "proportional allocation"<ref>This had the consequence in Democratically controlled states, after the [[Bush v. Gore|2000 Florida Recount]] and calls to abolish the [[Electoral College]], for party bosses to explain ''why'' winner-take-all is more beneficial to the state and that "proportional allocation" is a "feel-good" measure that has the effect of cancelling out votes within the same party and state.</ref>. |
| − | | + | [[Image:Liberal1984.jpg|thumb|right]] |
| | When Sen. Kennedy decided not to run in 1984, two insurgent candidates did appear, McGovern's 1972 "[[New Democrat]]" campaign manager Sen. Gary Hart, and [[Jesse Jackson]], who was to be the first [[African-American]] to win states in a major party primary election for president. Susan Estrich's words were prophetic: the good old white boy network, including Hart, shot him down<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/1984/05/20/us/disparity-between-jackson-s-vote-and-delegate-count-vexes-party.html?pagewanted=all DISPARITY BETWEEN JACKSON'S VOTE AND DELEGATE COUNT VEXES PARTY], By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM, ''New York Times'', May 20, 1984; see also ''New York Times'' on April 24, May 11, and May 24 of 1984 for articles reporting Jackson's complaint</ref>. The rules were written for a two-way contest between establishment insiders--Mondale and Kennedy, not the three-way slugfest between baby boomers, blacks, and the party Old Guard it came to be. | | When Sen. Kennedy decided not to run in 1984, two insurgent candidates did appear, McGovern's 1972 "[[New Democrat]]" campaign manager Sen. Gary Hart, and [[Jesse Jackson]], who was to be the first [[African-American]] to win states in a major party primary election for president. Susan Estrich's words were prophetic: the good old white boy network, including Hart, shot him down<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/1984/05/20/us/disparity-between-jackson-s-vote-and-delegate-count-vexes-party.html?pagewanted=all DISPARITY BETWEEN JACKSON'S VOTE AND DELEGATE COUNT VEXES PARTY], By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM, ''New York Times'', May 20, 1984; see also ''New York Times'' on April 24, May 11, and May 24 of 1984 for articles reporting Jackson's complaint</ref>. The rules were written for a two-way contest between establishment insiders--Mondale and Kennedy, not the three-way slugfest between baby boomers, blacks, and the party Old Guard it came to be. |
| | | | |
| Line 56: |
Line 56: |
| | Mondale stated outright that he would raise taxes as president. Americans rejected Mondale in a landslide—a repudiation of liberal policies.<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1984 United States presidential election of 1984]. ''Encyclopædia Britannica''. Retrieved December 18, 2016.</ref> | | Mondale stated outright that he would raise taxes as president. Americans rejected Mondale in a landslide—a repudiation of liberal policies.<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1984 United States presidential election of 1984]. ''Encyclopædia Britannica''. Retrieved December 18, 2016.</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | Mondale's defeat was by the largest margin since the 1930s, worse even than [[George McGovern|George McGovern's]] in 1972. While Mondale's defeat is striking, the campaign is also notable because it was the first time a woman was included on a major party's ticket. Mondale seriously considered [[Dioanne Feinstein]] of [[California]] for vice president, but passed her over for [[Geraldine Ferraro]].<ref>The Almanac of American Politics, 2010</ref> | + | Mondale's defeat was by the largest margin since the 1930s, worse even than [[George McGovern|George McGovern's]] in 1972. While Mondale's defeat is striking, the campaign is also notable because it was the first time a woman was included on a major party's ticket. Mondale seriously considered [[Dianne Feinstein]] of [[California]] for vice president, but passed her over for [[Geraldine Ferraro]].<ref>The Almanac of American Politics, 2010</ref> |
| | | | |
| | ==2002 Campaign== | | ==2002 Campaign== |