George McGovern was the most liberal person to ever run for the office of the president, and he lost in a landslide to Nixon. And the same can be said of Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakas.
When these guys ran on the opinions they truly believe, on a ticket of high taxes, large government programs, and business regulation, they are basically endorsing a ticket that is the opposite of what most Americans want. When this happens, they have historically lost in landslides against whoever the republican candidate was.
So, when McGovern changed his superdelagate pledge from Hillary Clinton to Obama today, most of us were not too surprised. And this brings me to the quote of the day, which came from the mouth of Rush Limbaugh:
McGovern endorsed Obama because "McGovern wants to see somebody lose in his lifetime worse than he did -- you know full well that Obama cannot put together a coalition that's victorious in November."
What he is implying here is that Obama is running on a ticket far more liberal than McGovern. While the odds look bad for republicans in 2008, and while democrats could easily slip into that office if they endorsed a candidate who was on the same page with Americans, they choose one of the most liberal candidates in the history of presidential elections.
Keep in mind that at this stage in the election cycle in 1992 Bill Clinton was in third place behind George H.W. Bush and that third party candidate (can't think of his name). And he went on to win the presidency with less than half the people supporting him. But Clinton ran as a moderate democrat, something democrats have to do to win elections.
I don't want to be arrogant, because anything can happen between now and November, it almost seems as though John McCain might just be the luckiest candidate in the history of presidential elections.
And that is the thought of the day.