Thursday, September 20, 2012

Andrew Sullivan Doubles Down On Joan Walsh's Presidential History Illiteracy

Not content with showing poor research, or deliberate obfuscation of historical facts in aid of polemics on behalf of the Dem's, as exposed in my previous article AT THIS LINK, Joan Walsh tweets favorably about an Andrew Sullivan post which refers,uncritically, to her post.

Walsh purports to set out that if Ryan loses he may have no future as a presidential candidate because, according to her "research" only one such candidate FDR, went on to win the presidency after losing as VP.

I set out, with a list of every losing VP candidates for the past 100 years that only three of them (some being dead at the next election) had a realistic chance for the nomination and one of the three won the presidency.  

Thus Walsh's post is straw man specious and based on a distorted premise

Sullivan for his part  AT THIS LINK sees a possible way out for Ryan from the supposed Romney sinking ship if Ryan wins his home state. However, even that salvation is apparently looking unlikely according to Sullivan's reading of the polls, and he sees  an unprecedented (to Sullivan's understanding) situation arising:

" Even if a loss in 2012 ended Ryan’s future presidential chances, it could perversely secure his position among movement conservatives all the more.
But if Obama wins Wisconsin by 14 points, as the new Marquette University Law School poll [PDF] shows, all bets are off.
Dishhead bait: when was there a losing ticket that lost the home states of both its candidates? Mondale won Minnesota. Dukakis won Massachusetts. Bush I won Texas. Dole won Kansas. Kerry won Massachusetts. McCain won Arizona. But Romney will lose Massachusetts and probably Michigan, and, after a bounce, it looks as if Ryan could be buried as veep in Wisconsin. That's gotta hurt.

That is conjecture of course (Wisconsin going for Obama by such a large margin) what is not conjecture is that Sullivan seems to have no knowledge of American political history-yet he holds himself out as a pundit.

Going back over the same 100 year history that I covered in the Walsh post, and in answer to his question "when was there a losing ticket that lost both home states of its candiates?" here, for Mr. Sullivan's information are seven such tickets.

1972 McGovern South Dakota/Shriver Maryland (born&died in Md.)
1956 Stevenson Ill./Kefauver Tenn.
1932 Landon Kansas/Knox Ill
1928 Hoover Cal./Curtis Kansas
1924 David W.Va./Bryan Nebraska
1920 Cox Ohio/Roosevelt N.Y
1912 Taft Ohio/Sherman N.Y.

Sullivan, who shares an anti-Palin obsession with Walsh, at least has the excuse of not being an American, but both destroy what credibility they may have by their, in his case openly admitted, bias and lack of research. Sullivan may call those who point out his errors as "Dishhead's" but that is just covering his error in advance with sarcasm and excuses his sloppy " research."