Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But somehow or other he accidentally ran for the office in 1976? People who don't want to be president enjoy a surefire method of avoiding it....don't run for the office. There is never a shortage of others who will be happy to step up and take the burden.
He did so, of course, completely against the wishes of the GOP and primary voters across the US.
He was obligated, and obligations meant something to a man of Leslie L. King Jr's integrity, no matter what changes were thrown at him.
Of course, that's a completely foreign notion, these days - adjective oh-so-carefully chosen.
He did so, of course, completely against the wishes of the GOP and primary voters across the US.
He was obligated, and obligations meant something to a man of Leslie L. King Jr's integrity, no matter what changes were thrown at him.
Of course, that's a completely foreign notion, these days - adjective oh-so-carefully chosen.
I didn't want to be president in 1976, and you know what? I managed to avoid it. So did millions of others. It was only Ford, who despite also not wanting to be president, ran for the office as his party's nominee.
This is just silly. We have your insisting that he didn't want to do something, and we have him doing it anyway. Ford would have had to have been terribly dense to not know how he could have avoided running for the office. He faced a strong challenge from Ronald Reagan and barely beat him in the primaries. If he didn't want to be president, he could have simply conceded things to Reagan. Instead he ran a hard fought campaign. None of his behavior is remotely consistent with the idea that he didn't want the office.
I leave you to it with the thought that on my bucket list is a visit to RMN's grave in Whittier, small vial of liquid waste for sprinkling surreptitiously in hand.
Your understanding of Ford and the now-vanished 20th century politicians of his stripe, however, is greatly lacking and distorted through lenses made in 2019.
Your understanding of Ford and the now-vanished 20th century politicians of his stripe, however, is greatly lacking and distorted through lenses made in 2019.
Again...where are the specifics of your charge? What is distorted about my view of Ford? What is distorted about the view that someone who runs for the presidency, is doing so because he or she wants the office?
Know what I think? I think that you posted without really thinking through the consequences of your position. Now you are stuck defending it even though you now recognize that it was nonsensical. This accounts for why you have no answers for my specific questions.
I think that you posted without really thinking through the consequences of your position.
Other than occasional irresistible snark, the one thing I do not do here, which differentiates me from well over 90% of the posters, is pull random sh*t from my posterior, especially because I just saw it on some blog or a Fox News crawl. I will stand behind anything I say here to the last footnote.
But I won't do it with posters who can only spout circular arguments and political dogma. That old saw about arguing with a fool, you know. You've quite clearly demonstrated you know Jerry Ford only at a level of Chevy Chase's sketches.
Other than occasional irresistible snark, the one thing I do not do here, which differentiates me from well over 90% of the posters, is pull random sh*t from my posterior, especially because I just saw it on some blog or a Fox News crawl. I will stand behind anything I say here to the last footnote.
But I won't do it with posters who can only spout circular arguments and political dogma. That old saw about arguing with a fool, you know. You've quite clearly demonstrated you know Jerry Ford only at a level of Chevy Chase's sketches.
And once more you have chosen not to answer my questions, instead substituting the above personal claptrap. Now why is that? You characterize rather than confront, you use insults to serve as answers. You will "stand by" a position that you are apparently unable or unwilling to defend.
You aren't doing very well here, are you?
As a reminder..the questions for which you have failed to provide an answer:
1. What would have been the nature of the "disaster" caused by placing Nixon on trial?
2. If Ford did not want to be president, then why did he put so much effort into seeking re-election?
Nothing about who is a fool or who doesn't understand Ford, or "black revisionism", whatever that is.....either answer the questions or admit that you lack satisfactory answers.
Instead of being let off by Ford? Seems ridiculous how he just got off with just a slap on the wrist. Sure he resigned, but the higher you are, the more you should fall. Being the President to do something like that should mean life in prison with Bubba as a friend.
You need to remember how things were at that time, September 1974. And to me, as I will show, Watergate was far from his worst offense. Even though I am a liberal extremist, I favored the pardon then and I do so now.
I was at the end of my Freshman year of high school on June 17, 1972, the night of the Watergate burglary. I was starting my senior year in September 1974, when Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon. Far more than Watergate ailed the country at that time. Nixon took a variety of actions that were expedient in ensuring his re-election but quite harmful to the nation's interests.
Manipulation of the Economy Worthy of Latin America
Through no fault of Nixon's, the 1969-70 recession was one of the first where we had the worst of both worlds, inflation and rising unemployment To recreate the "Goldilocks economy" of the mid1950's and the early 1960's in time for the upcoming 1972 election, Nixon imposed wage and price controls in August 1971,while at the same time leaning on the Fed to gun the money supply. This was in order to create the illusion of prosperity with low inflation. Policies worthy of Honduras and Guatemala. Inflation surged when controls were taking off precipitously on January 11, 1973, with the election safely past. Inflation rocketed from 3.6% in 1972 well over 12% in 1974. There were extensive gas lines at the end of 1973 in the first quarter of 1974. Even before the legendary lines, from May through July 1973, certain areas were plagued by spot shortages of gasoline. The winters of 1971-72 and 1972-73 had spot shortages of heating oil. In short, the government was not in the position to ensure delivery of necessities to the people. As a result, Things were in great disarray. I was about the only high school senior in my school to support the Nixon pardon. And was not because I liked Nixon. I didn't. We as a nation had to "change the topic."
Surrenders of U.S. Interests in Peking, Moscow and the Paris Peace Talks
Among other Nixon offenses verging of crimes, Nixon was figuratively on his hands and knees summitteering in Peking, as it was then called, and Moscow to create an illusion of accomplishment. SALT I had nothing good for the U.S. in it, and Taiwan was thrown under the bus.
Supposedly, Nixon had had a "secret plan” to end the Vietnam War. that "secret plan” turned out to be a phased surrender to the Vietcong.
Quid Pro Quo for Pardon
In addition I do believe there was a "deal" or "understanding" to pardon Nixon in exchange for his resignation. Getting him out of office, by any legal means possible, was crucial at that point, including a quid pro quo for a pardon. Quite simply, the U.S. was at risk of a depression, and Nixon would not have been a reassuring presence.
Ford took the right action when he pardoned Nixon at that time. There were worries what Nixon would do prior to his resignation. However, in that instance and in that time, Ford's actions were correct.
Getting Nixon out of office by Ford promising to pardon him was not necessary.
Republicans made it clear that Nixon did not have the support in Congress. Nixon's goose was cooked.
Ford's quid pro quo sweetened the pot, but it was not necessary.
We still don't know whether a removed President has recourse to the Courts on appeal from a Senate "conviction." If you were around in 1974 you would not want to have found out, either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
