UTAH, for crying out loud!
Johnson also successfully painted his opponent, Republican Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, as a right-wing legislator who wanted to abolish the social welfare programs created in the 1930s (such as Social Security). LBJ advocated more such programs, and after 1965, instituted three: Medicare, Medicaid, and the War on Poverty. With these factors working for him, Johnson easily won the Presidency, carrying 44 of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. As of 2009, Johnson's 22.6 percentage point-margin of victory in the popular vote is the fifth-largest such margin in Presidential election history (after the margins of the 1920 election, 1924 election, 1936 election, and 1972 election). Johnson won 61.1% of the national popular vote, which remains the highest popular-vote percentage won by a U.S.presidential candidate since 1820. The election is also remembered because of Goldwater's status as a pioneer in the modern conservative movement.
No post-1964 Democratic candidate has managed to best LBJ's 1964 electoral result.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1964 So what has changed since then? Was it Viet Nam? The Civil Rights Act? Reagan? The death of the Fairness Doctrine? 9/11? Or is it that the Democratic leadership has been playing defense ever since 1968, and Americans love to see a candidate fight for a set of principles.
When LBJ was faced with an assault on our Social Safety net, how did he respond? Did he survive by compromising? FUCK NO, he doubled down and proposed MORE social programs. He fought for what he believed in, he didn't bargain, he didn't retreat, and by god he didn't lose either. In fact, he won an historic victory.
LBJ.kicked.ass.
Now, Obama makes compromise after compromise, and Dem voters are left trying to find some satisfaction in the fact that we haven't lost Planned Parenthood!!
How has such a simple but essential thing, which should be an absolute given in any sane society, become the weak standard by which we judge success?
Obama seemed to be the one who would return us to LBJ's Great Society and War on Poverty, but either he misjudged his mandate, or we misjudged his motivations. In either case, it no longer seems like the party leadership wants the same things we want.
So answer me this - when BOTH of our current voting choices support variations of "promote the wealthy at the expense of the poor" how in the world do we turn this around and achieve "safety for the poor with the support of the wealthy"? None of the Republicans support the poor, and neither, it seems, do the Dems.
So tell me again, how do we VOTE our way out of this mess?