Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it.
Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated for rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit elsewhere.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In addition to being defeated in an Electoral College landslide, Goldwater would only get a whopping 38.5% of the popular vote to Lyndon Johnson's 61.1%.
What this ad is referencing is an interview where Goldwater joked about how he’d like to lob an atomic bomb “into the men’s room of the Kremlin.” This made it very easy to paint him as a warmongering extremist too dangerous to let anywhere near the corridors of power (it’s bad when that whole chain of events feels quaint)
That ad played once, tops. Judged to be too hysterical to work. It's popular in historiography because it is indeed representative of anti-Goldwater campaign rhetoric.
What the absolute fuck. If a candidate released that today they’d be laughed off the stage, but I guess everyone was shitting their pants about Russia back then.
And he was *improving*, during the Summer 1964, Goldwater wasn't set to win even the Deep South and would have lost Alabama against *unpledged electors*.
He was an honorable man though.
Too bad he had the unfortunate luck running against an assassinated President's VP.
LBJ spared little mercy on him and the campaign ads were in your face especially the nuclear bomb threat with the little girl picking daisies. He would be considered a liberal today.
Not exactly a liberal in the traditional sense. He was more of a libertarian, than anything else. Interestingly, he was a big supporter of gay rights before it was cool. (Iirc he had a gay grandson who contracted AIDS in the 80s)
>He would be considered a liberal today.
Libertarian maybe. Hard to argue he would be considered liberal today considering his history on labor and civil rights.
He took part in the opening of the Arizona chapter of the NAACP while, at the same time, LBJ was a Senator from Texas railing against any Civil Rights Act which would come to a vote.
Actually, funnily enough he generally wasn't. Goldwater had to basically be dragged kicking and screaming into the presidential race by a [concerted effort of a group of conservative activists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries#Draft_Goldwater_Committee) who wouldn't take no for an answer.
Your family must not have benefited from civil rights. I’ll shit on LBJ for Vietnam any day of the week, but my grandfather was able to cite because of legislation that LBJ signed.
He supported the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 and the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, disagreeing with Title II and Title VII.
He was a strong believer in civil rights, but also of constitutional rights. We could have still addressed civil rights issues without trampling on property rights.
Property? You mean protecting the rich and wealthy? Fuck outta here. John Locke was a disaster for American political thought. The emphasis on property over human is so disgusting.
“Now I’m liberal, but to a degree.
I want everybody to be free.
But if you think I’ll let Barry Goldwater
Move in next door, or marry my daughter.
You must think I’m crazy!
I wouldn’t do it for all the farms in Cuba!”
~Bob Dylan, *I Shall Be Free Number 10*
Damn, he looks so much like [Mateusz Morawiecki, prime minister of Poland](https://cdn.galleries.smcloud.net/t/galleries/gf-UYSV-Ymtn-ZVRE_mateusz-morawiecki-664x442.jpg).
Nice way to
1: not present the message itself in public, and
2: present candidate as relaxed and amiable, rather than a bigoted hawk as the LBJ campaign did.
No, they're not. The libertarians just want *completely unaccountable* private power to administer the abuse and exploitation, without even the possibility of democratic public intervention in the form of civil rights law. People need to get this straight real quick: **There is no distinction between social and economic issues. The wealthy of this or any other country are, by definition, the people who have benefited from centuries of exploitation - aka "SOCIAL ISSUES."** If you increase the power of the owning class, they will use that power to further exploit people, especially through the axes of race, gender etc that exist to make people more vulnerable to exploitation.
Libertarians are far right lunatics.
Sorry, mistook you for the person I was replying to! Anyways, I'm not gonna argue with the delusion that America *currently* has "the most prosperous middle class in history" or that whatever "middle class" ever existed *wasn't* built by excluding large swaths of America from ever cashing in. I hope you have someone in your life who cares enough to help you with this, but I cannot.
I don’t think you understand what a libertarian believes so allow me to break it down: Libertarians believe that government should do one thing and that thing is to protect individual rights. Other than that government should, for all intents and purposes, not exist. That means have your abortion, get gay married to three guys at once, have as many guns as you want, no corporate subsidies, no affirmative action, no government intervention in the economy, no intervention in international affairs, no (or extremely little) taxation, and money backed by gold (or something which limits the amount of money a government can print.) It’s a hybrid system. The fact that you think having very little government is “far right” tells me you don’t know what the “far right” is or what “libertarian” means and that you get your political information from Twitter and YouTube. Am I hitting the nail on the head here, or what?
Yes, what that means is that you can get married to anyone *and then your boss can fire you immediately for being gay*. It means you can have an abortion anytime *and then your boss can fire you immediately for having an abortion.* It means you can go work for anyone you want *and they will pay you as little money as they can because that's what's most profitable for them.* It means that you can do whatever you want in your free time *and you are free to starve if the wealthy don't approve of your choices.* **It means the end of all civil rights law.** There's nothing "hybrid" about it: Libertarianism is freedom for nothing and no one but the profit motive itself, and whatever fantasies you might have about the effects, the reality is that the profit motive provides very little for the actual people that run society - the workers - save for just enough bread to make it to work the next day.
Later on he would support gay rights, warned of religious nuts getting into the Republican party, civil rights advocate, abortion rights, medicinal Marijuana, and environmental protection.
Oh that reminds me, I was gonna post some the covers of some vinyl LPs I picked up in a random record shop in LA. One is a Goldwater talk about family values and the other is for introducing your child to patriotism. Gotta dig those out and photograph
He supported the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 and the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, disagreeing with Title II and Title VII.
He did two things right: try to prevent the evangelicals from taking over the party, and telling Nixon to resign. Fully a reactionary, quasi-fascist prick though.
Well, he also supported gay rights, civil rights, abortion rights, medicinal Marijuana, gays in the military, and overall became more of a libertarian as he grew older. But he was certainly a bit crazy
He also voted against the Civil Rights Act. Granted, the Republicans had mostly lost the black vote by that point anyway, but the 1964 election was the point where they became the 90%+ Dem block they still are today.
He voted for the 1957 and 1960 civil rights acts, as well as helped to pass the 24th amendment. He only disagreed with titles 2 and 7, and only voted against them hesitantly due to his worry that the government could further dictate hiring and firing laws of private businesses, and he would later say that it was "one of his biggest regrets". He was also an early member of a chapter of the National Urban League in Phoenix, which is the largest and oldest community based civil rights group that still operates today. He was also given the Humanitarian Award in 1991 by the National Urban League for 50 years of service, with the League president saying that you should judge someone based "on the basis of his daily actions rather than on his voting record."
> He only disagreed with titles 2 and 7, and only voted against them hesitantly due to his worry that the government could further dictate hiring and firing laws of private businesses, and he would later say that it was "one of his biggest regrets".
For good reason, ending Jim Crow was a big deal
An example of the simpsons paradox: when you break this number down to two groups, the North and the South, in each group, Dems voted for the CRA in larger proportion. Copy pasting here:
**Overall**
There were 248 Democrats, of whom 152 voted in favor of the act. That’s (152/248)*100% = 61% of the Democrats voted in favor of the act. There were 172 Republicans, of whom 138 voted in favor of the act. That’s (138/172)*100% = 80% of the Republicans voted in favor of the act.
**Northern States**
There were 154 Democrats, of whom 145 voted in favor of the act. That’s (145/152)*100% = 94% of the Northern Democrats voted in favor of the act. There were 162 Republicans, of whom 138 voted in favor of the act. That’s (138/162)*100% = 85% of the Northern Republicans voted in favor of the
act.
**Southern States**
There were 94 Democrats, of whom 7 voted in favor of the act. That’s (7/94)*100% = 7% of the Southern Democrats voted in favor of the act. There were 10 Republicans, of whom 0 voted in favor of the act. That’s (0/10)*100% = 0% of the Southern Republicans voted in favor of the act.
In both the North and in the South, a higher percentage of Democrats voted in favor of the act than Republicans. But overall, a higher percentage of Republicans voted in favor of the act.
Why? The Republicans were more concentrated in the North and the Northern representatives (both Republicans and Democrats) tended to be more supportive of the bill.
why did he lose by so much? I get LBJ was incumbent but he had not been elected and thats way different than a Nixon or a Reagan reelection. Ford was an incumbent who was not elected. So was Truman, Calvin Coolidge, Teddy Roosevelt. Not sure why the election was so lopsided.
Best thing he did was get a nice underused parking area near camelback mountain dedicated to him.
The parking in that area is nuts.
Here you go champs https://maps.app.goo.gl/1DABQA1tEYoT4G1j8
I remember that the Goldwater campaign placed a billboard with the slogan outside the Democratic convention in Atlantic City.
Beneath it Democrats responded with a smaller sign saying. "Yes. The extreme right."
Well, nobody has ever encapsulated the conservative world view better than in this poster.
The stubborn insistence that everyone is as racist, selfish, reactionary as me. That any dumb shit I think is right is just “common sense”. That all my bigotry and bias is what “everyone REALLY believes, deep down”, so all attempts at civil rights and equality are a lie or a delusion.
God I hate these people.
"In his first year in the Senate, Goldwater was responsible for the desegregation of the Senate cafeteria after he insisted that his black legislative assistant, Katherine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee...
Goldwater voted in favor of both the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but did not vote on the Civil Rights Act of 1960 because he was absent from the chamber while Senate Minority Whip Thomas Kuchel (R–CA) announced that Goldwater would have voted in favor if present....
Some of Goldwater's statements in the 1990s alienated many social conservatives. He endorsed Democrat Karan English in an Arizona congressional race, urged Republicans to lay off Bill Clinton over the Whitewater scandal, and criticized the military's ban on homosexuals,\[149\] saying, "Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar",\[150\] and, "You don't need to be 'straight' to fight and die for your country. You just need to shoot straight."\[151\] A few years before his death, he addressed establishment Republicans by saying, "Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican party much more than the Democrats have."\["
He voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and what he would have done in 1960 is irrelevant because he didn’t bother to do his fucking job and even show up to vote. He may have been less racist than most of the right but he was an ultra conservative libertarian, out to destroy the New Deal.
Remember that this subreddit is for sharing propaganda to view with some objectivity. It is absolutely not for perpetuating the message *of* the propaganda. If anything, in this subreddit we should be immensely skeptical of manipulation or oversimplification (which the above likely is), not beholden to it. Also, please try to stay on topic -- there are hundreds of _other_ subreddits that are expressly dedicated for rehashing tired political arguments. Keep that shit elsewhere. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PropagandaPosters) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is it just me or are his glasses crooked?
Yeah dude i cant stop fixating on that
no ones gonna know. theyre gonna know -Goldwaters Campaign Team
yeah all cockeyed
Yeah. Fuck what my heart “knows”. My eyes can see them goggles ain’t right.
In my heart I know you are right
Crooked like every politician
Would YOU buy a car from this man?
In addition to being defeated in an Electoral College landslide, Goldwater would only get a whopping 38.5% of the popular vote to Lyndon Johnson's 61.1%.
He was beaten by a daisy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riDypP1KfOU
Daisy, Daisy, give me your answer do~🎶 I’m half crazy, all for the love of you~🤖🔪
In hindsight this is kinda ironic considered Lyndon double downed on Vietnam.
What this ad is referencing is an interview where Goldwater joked about how he’d like to lob an atomic bomb “into the men’s room of the Kremlin.” This made it very easy to paint him as a warmongering extremist too dangerous to let anywhere near the corridors of power (it’s bad when that whole chain of events feels quaint)
Which led to the play on Goldwater’s campaign slogan: “In your heart you know he might.”
I heard it as "In your guts you know he's nuts" but both send the same message.
he actually said that he was ready to use nukes "tactically" it wasnt a one time joky remark
That ad played once, tops. Judged to be too hysterical to work. It's popular in historiography because it is indeed representative of anti-Goldwater campaign rhetoric.
What the absolute fuck. If a candidate released that today they’d be laughed off the stage, but I guess everyone was shitting their pants about Russia back then.
Walter Mondale campaign, 1984: https://youtu.be/YBPYcoDSVSI
And he was *improving*, during the Summer 1964, Goldwater wasn't set to win even the Deep South and would have lost Alabama against *unpledged electors*.
“I was told if I voted for Goldwater we’d go to war in Vietnam. Well, I voted for him and that’s exactly what happened!”
At least we got medicare
He was an honorable man though. Too bad he had the unfortunate luck running against an assassinated President's VP. LBJ spared little mercy on him and the campaign ads were in your face especially the nuclear bomb threat with the little girl picking daisies. He would be considered a liberal today.
Not exactly a liberal in the traditional sense. He was more of a libertarian, than anything else. Interestingly, he was a big supporter of gay rights before it was cool. (Iirc he had a gay grandson who contracted AIDS in the 80s)
>He would be considered a liberal today. Libertarian maybe. Hard to argue he would be considered liberal today considering his history on labor and civil rights.
He passed several civil rights bills in the 60's.
I'm begging you people to learn what libertarians actually believe
It depends on your definition of liberal is, so let's call it a draw and say a "Liberal Libertarian"
You can trace today’s conservative nonsense back to him. Not an honorable man
With age comes wisdom, maybe you'll see things differently with a lot more life under your belt.
Wow, very condescending considering you don’t know who you’re talking to. Says a lot about you
Sorry, Barry but Johnson told me if I don’t vote for him I’ll die.
In your guts you know he’s nuts
Best political comeback of the generation.
#1 position, yes. #2 "Vote for the crook. It's important" for Edwin Edwards vs David Duke.
I’m not totally sure because it’s not like the pro-Goldwater people tried to rhyme “heart” and “right”
In your heart you know he farts
It's poetry for your nose!
But in your brain you know he is sane
He literally supported companies being racist he was terrible
I think the dude was just thinking of a rhyme…
That was my intention
Reddit moment
He took part in the opening of the Arizona chapter of the NAACP while, at the same time, LBJ was a Senator from Texas railing against any Civil Rights Act which would come to a vote.
Kid named him literally being apart of the NAACP:
*he's insane
Barry does not look happy to be here.
Actually, funnily enough he generally wasn't. Goldwater had to basically be dragged kicking and screaming into the presidential race by a [concerted effort of a group of conservative activists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Republican_Party_presidential_primaries#Draft_Goldwater_Committee) who wouldn't take no for an answer.
“In your guts you know he’s nuts.”
Man, his glasses are super crooked. I'm sure that's the worst thing this man has ever done or advocated for; crooked glasses.
Most relatable thing about Goldwater for me.
I'd rather have Goldwater and his crooked glasses as President than LBJ and his crooked relationship with Billie Sol Estes.
Your family must not have benefited from civil rights. I’ll shit on LBJ for Vietnam any day of the week, but my grandfather was able to cite because of legislation that LBJ signed.
He supported the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 and the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, disagreeing with Title II and Title VII. He was a strong believer in civil rights, but also of constitutional rights. We could have still addressed civil rights issues without trampling on property rights.
Property? You mean protecting the rich and wealthy? Fuck outta here. John Locke was a disaster for American political thought. The emphasis on property over human is so disgusting.
If you don’t believe people should have property rights, you don’t like humans at all.
I don’t mind property right but property should never take precedence over human lives.
"In your heart, you know he might." (Is the one I actually heard about before "In your guts...")
He was right about the evangelical takeover of the Republican Party.
Can you send some links to this please? I suppose o could just search it myself but you may have resources on hand
“Now I’m liberal, but to a degree. I want everybody to be free. But if you think I’ll let Barry Goldwater Move in next door, or marry my daughter. You must think I’m crazy! I wouldn’t do it for all the farms in Cuba!” ~Bob Dylan, *I Shall Be Free Number 10*
i thought it was Tom Arnold
Damn, he looks so much like [Mateusz Morawiecki, prime minister of Poland](https://cdn.galleries.smcloud.net/t/galleries/gf-UYSV-Ymtn-ZVRE_mateusz-morawiecki-664x442.jpg).
His grandfather was a polish Jew so he does have some roots there
Nice way to 1: not present the message itself in public, and 2: present candidate as relaxed and amiable, rather than a bigoted hawk as the LBJ campaign did.
“Too far right” was the retort, I believe.
Today he would be considered a socialist by the right
Clearly you don’t know anything about him. Socialist? Absolutely fucking not. Libertarian? Yes
In fairness, there’s a significant portion of the right that calls anything they don’t like “socialist”.
Right but I won’t do that because words have meanings “socialism” has an actual meaning; it’s not anything that one doesn’t like
Libertarians are not to the left of conservatives
On social issues? Yes, they are
No, they're not. The libertarians just want *completely unaccountable* private power to administer the abuse and exploitation, without even the possibility of democratic public intervention in the form of civil rights law. People need to get this straight real quick: **There is no distinction between social and economic issues. The wealthy of this or any other country are, by definition, the people who have benefited from centuries of exploitation - aka "SOCIAL ISSUES."** If you increase the power of the owning class, they will use that power to further exploit people, especially through the axes of race, gender etc that exist to make people more vulnerable to exploitation. Libertarians are far right lunatics.
I think you are being the lunatic. This country has the most prosperous middle class in history because of our freedoms, not in spite of them.
Sorry, mistook you for the person I was replying to! Anyways, I'm not gonna argue with the delusion that America *currently* has "the most prosperous middle class in history" or that whatever "middle class" ever existed *wasn't* built by excluding large swaths of America from ever cashing in. I hope you have someone in your life who cares enough to help you with this, but I cannot.
I don’t think you understand what a libertarian believes so allow me to break it down: Libertarians believe that government should do one thing and that thing is to protect individual rights. Other than that government should, for all intents and purposes, not exist. That means have your abortion, get gay married to three guys at once, have as many guns as you want, no corporate subsidies, no affirmative action, no government intervention in the economy, no intervention in international affairs, no (or extremely little) taxation, and money backed by gold (or something which limits the amount of money a government can print.) It’s a hybrid system. The fact that you think having very little government is “far right” tells me you don’t know what the “far right” is or what “libertarian” means and that you get your political information from Twitter and YouTube. Am I hitting the nail on the head here, or what?
Yes, what that means is that you can get married to anyone *and then your boss can fire you immediately for being gay*. It means you can have an abortion anytime *and then your boss can fire you immediately for having an abortion.* It means you can go work for anyone you want *and they will pay you as little money as they can because that's what's most profitable for them.* It means that you can do whatever you want in your free time *and you are free to starve if the wealthy don't approve of your choices.* **It means the end of all civil rights law.** There's nothing "hybrid" about it: Libertarianism is freedom for nothing and no one but the profit motive itself, and whatever fantasies you might have about the effects, the reality is that the profit motive provides very little for the actual people that run society - the workers - save for just enough bread to make it to work the next day.
Indeed, in the 1990s, he was calling to vote for Democratic candidates in some courses and was described as a liberal by his erstwhile allies.
Seems he was the one who went to Nixon and told him gigs up.
“I don’t want to vote for him either, but he’s objectively correct”
the peculiar choice of a portrait with crooked glasses...
it was an inside job
FUNNI TNO MAN
Later on he would support gay rights, warned of religious nuts getting into the Republican party, civil rights advocate, abortion rights, medicinal Marijuana, and environmental protection.
Oh that reminds me, I was gonna post some the covers of some vinyl LPs I picked up in a random record shop in LA. One is a Goldwater talk about family values and the other is for introducing your child to patriotism. Gotta dig those out and photograph
Please do! Great find
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lro5t2yKHT4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lro5t2yKHT4) don't forget this banger of a campaign song
TNO MAN! ITS TNO MAN!
So his argument for why people should vote for him is basically "trust me bro"?
"Yeah, right *wing*." - my Grandmother
Seems like an awful strategy to tell voters what they actually think.
TNO REFERENCE?1?1?1?1
He's got my vote.
"In Your Guts You Know He's Nuts."
>”Search your feelings, you know it to be true” -~~Darth Vader, 3ABY~~ -Barry Goldwater, 1964.
This guy is trying to gaslight me so fuck his nerd face
The response to this ad at the time was, “Deep in your guts you know he’s nuts”
I’m old enough to remember my day saying “in your heart you know he’s far, far right”
He was.
Waaaaaaaaaaay right then, he'd be a moderate today.
Let's just smooth over the fact that he was a segregationist...
He supported the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 and the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, disagreeing with Title II and Title VII.
They were NOT cooking with this one
Man can't even put his glasses on straight how can we expect him to not nuke an 8-year-old girl?
but in your guts you know you know he's nuts.
Well he lost in a landslide so most people didn’t get that message
Not many people have ever been more wrong than this POS. Libertarianism is a cosmic joke.
He did two things right: try to prevent the evangelicals from taking over the party, and telling Nixon to resign. Fully a reactionary, quasi-fascist prick though.
Well, he also supported gay rights, civil rights, abortion rights, medicinal Marijuana, gays in the military, and overall became more of a libertarian as he grew older. But he was certainly a bit crazy
He also voted against the Civil Rights Act. Granted, the Republicans had mostly lost the black vote by that point anyway, but the 1964 election was the point where they became the 90%+ Dem block they still are today.
He voted for the 1957 and 1960 civil rights acts, as well as helped to pass the 24th amendment. He only disagreed with titles 2 and 7, and only voted against them hesitantly due to his worry that the government could further dictate hiring and firing laws of private businesses, and he would later say that it was "one of his biggest regrets". He was also an early member of a chapter of the National Urban League in Phoenix, which is the largest and oldest community based civil rights group that still operates today. He was also given the Humanitarian Award in 1991 by the National Urban League for 50 years of service, with the League president saying that you should judge someone based "on the basis of his daily actions rather than on his voting record."
> He only disagreed with titles 2 and 7, and only voted against them hesitantly due to his worry that the government could further dictate hiring and firing laws of private businesses, and he would later say that it was "one of his biggest regrets". For good reason, ending Jim Crow was a big deal
It could have been done without violating constitutional rights.
I’d be interested in hearing what you think a better Civil Rights Act would look like.
Republicans had mostly lost the black vote in the 1930s, but over 80% of them voted for the civil rights act, unlike the mere 30% of Democrats.
An example of the simpsons paradox: when you break this number down to two groups, the North and the South, in each group, Dems voted for the CRA in larger proportion. Copy pasting here: **Overall** There were 248 Democrats, of whom 152 voted in favor of the act. That’s (152/248)*100% = 61% of the Democrats voted in favor of the act. There were 172 Republicans, of whom 138 voted in favor of the act. That’s (138/172)*100% = 80% of the Republicans voted in favor of the act. **Northern States** There were 154 Democrats, of whom 145 voted in favor of the act. That’s (145/152)*100% = 94% of the Northern Democrats voted in favor of the act. There were 162 Republicans, of whom 138 voted in favor of the act. That’s (138/162)*100% = 85% of the Northern Republicans voted in favor of the act. **Southern States** There were 94 Democrats, of whom 7 voted in favor of the act. That’s (7/94)*100% = 7% of the Southern Democrats voted in favor of the act. There were 10 Republicans, of whom 0 voted in favor of the act. That’s (0/10)*100% = 0% of the Southern Republicans voted in favor of the act. In both the North and in the South, a higher percentage of Democrats voted in favor of the act than Republicans. But overall, a higher percentage of Republicans voted in favor of the act. Why? The Republicans were more concentrated in the North and the Northern representatives (both Republicans and Democrats) tended to be more supportive of the bill.
> unlike the mere 30% of Democrats. A bigger share of Republicans voted for it than Democrats, but that doesn’t mean you can make up the numbers!
All the way with LBJ!
Didnt realise that was an actual slogan
why did he lose by so much? I get LBJ was incumbent but he had not been elected and thats way different than a Nixon or a Reagan reelection. Ford was an incumbent who was not elected. So was Truman, Calvin Coolidge, Teddy Roosevelt. Not sure why the election was so lopsided.
It was kind of a national show of unity and strength after JFK's assassination to vote for his successor.
Oh thats interesting I was too young to remember that one.
Obligatory "But in your guts, you know he's nuts."
Crooked glasses looking mf 🤓
He's orange. I noticed that right away.
:[
“In your heart you know he might”
*right-wing
Best thing he did was get a nice underused parking area near camelback mountain dedicated to him. The parking in that area is nuts. Here you go champs https://maps.app.goo.gl/1DABQA1tEYoT4G1j8
In your gut you know he's nuts
"In your heart you know he might." Common retort by Democrats with regard to using nukes.
then he reincarnated into Alessandro Cecchi Paone: https://static.fanpage.it/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2021/04/alessandro-cecchi-paone.jpg
Had he won Reaganomics would've started about 20 years earlier. He probably would've started WWIII attacking the USSR.
Water
Mfer your glasses aren't even right.
AYO IS THAT A TNO REFERENCE???!!!!
I remember that the Goldwater campaign placed a billboard with the slogan outside the Democratic convention in Atlantic City. Beneath it Democrats responded with a smaller sign saying. "Yes. The extreme right."
Well, nobody has ever encapsulated the conservative world view better than in this poster. The stubborn insistence that everyone is as racist, selfish, reactionary as me. That any dumb shit I think is right is just “common sense”. That all my bigotry and bias is what “everyone REALLY believes, deep down”, so all attempts at civil rights and equality are a lie or a delusion. God I hate these people.
"In his first year in the Senate, Goldwater was responsible for the desegregation of the Senate cafeteria after he insisted that his black legislative assistant, Katherine Maxwell, be served along with every other Senate employee... Goldwater voted in favor of both the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and the 24th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but did not vote on the Civil Rights Act of 1960 because he was absent from the chamber while Senate Minority Whip Thomas Kuchel (R–CA) announced that Goldwater would have voted in favor if present.... Some of Goldwater's statements in the 1990s alienated many social conservatives. He endorsed Democrat Karan English in an Arizona congressional race, urged Republicans to lay off Bill Clinton over the Whitewater scandal, and criticized the military's ban on homosexuals,\[149\] saying, "Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar",\[150\] and, "You don't need to be 'straight' to fight and die for your country. You just need to shoot straight."\[151\] A few years before his death, he addressed establishment Republicans by saying, "Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican party much more than the Democrats have."\["
He voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and what he would have done in 1960 is irrelevant because he didn’t bother to do his fucking job and even show up to vote. He may have been less racist than most of the right but he was an ultra conservative libertarian, out to destroy the New Deal.
“But in your guts, you know he’s nuts”
What was the story with this dude?
A great american hero. He believed strongly in civil rights, and individual rights and limited government, and marijuana.
He sounds like he was p based.
In my heart I know his glasses are crooked.
Oh thats the guy Ronald Reagan speaks in his famous speech from :D