A lot of people who weren’t alive to witness the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago are wondering if it’s legendary chaos. I evaluated that possibility at New York:
When the Democratic National Committee chose Chicago as the site of the party’s 2024 national convention a year ago, no one knew incumbent presidential nominee Joe Biden would become the target of major antiwar demonstrations. The fateful events of October 7 were nearly six months away, and Biden had yet to formally announce his candidacy for reelection. So there was no reason to anticipate comparisons to the riotous 1968 Democratic Convention, when images of police clashing with anti–Vietnam War protesters in the Windy City were broadcast into millions of homes. Indeed, a year ago, a more likely analog to 2024 might have been the last Democratic convention in Chicago in 1996; that event was an upbeat vehicle for Bill Clinton’s successful reelection campaign.
Instead, thanks to intense controversy over Israel’s lethal operations in Gaza and widespread global protests aimed partly at Israel’s allies and sponsors in Washington, plans are well underway for demonstrations in Chicago during the August 19 to 22 confab. Organizers say they expect as many as 30,000 protesters to gather outside Chicago’s United Center during the convention. As in the past, a key issue is how close the protests get to the actual convention. Obviously, demonstrators want delegates to hear their voices and the media to amplify their message. And police, Chicago officials, and Democratic Party leaders want protests to occur as far away from the convention as possible. How well these divergent interests are met will determine whether there is anything like the kind of clashes that dominated Chicago ’68.
There are, however, some big differences in the context surrounding the two conventions. Here’s why the odds of a 2024 convention showdown rivaling 1968 are actually fairly low.
Horrific as the ongoing events in Gaza undoubtedly are, and with all due consideration of the U.S. role in backing and supplying Israel now and in the past, the Vietnam War was a more viscerally immediate crisis for both the protesters who descended on Chicago that summer and the Americans watching the spectacle on TV. There were over a half-million American troops deployed in Vietnam in 1968, and nearly 300,000 young men were drafted into the Army and Marines that year. Many of the protesters at the convention were protesting their own or family members’ future personal involvement in the war, or an escape overseas beyond the Selective Service System’s reach (an estimated 125,000 Americans fled to Canada during the Vietnam War, and how to deal with them upon repatriation became a major political issue for years).
Even from a purely humanitarian and altruistic point of view, Vietnamese military and civilian casualties ran into the millions during the period of U.S. involvement. It wasn’t common to call what was happening “genocide,” but there’s no question the images emanating from the war (which spilled over catastrophically into Laos and especially Cambodia) were deeply disturbing to the consciences of vast numbers of Americans.
Perhaps a better analogy for the Gaza protests than those of the Vietnam era might be the extensive protests during the late 1970s and 1980s over apartheid in South Africa (a regime that enjoyed explicit and implicit backing from multiple U.S. administrations) and in favor of a freeze in development and deployment of nuclear weapons. These were significant protest movements, but still paled next to the organized opposition to the Vietnam War.
One reason the 1968 Chicago protests created such an indelible image is that the conflict outside on the streets was reflected in conflict inside the convention venue. For one thing, 1968 nominee Hubert Humphrey had not quelled formal opposition to his selection when the convention opened. He never entered or won a single primary. One opponent who did, Eugene McCarthy, was still battling for the nomination in Chicago. Another, Robert F. Kennedy, had been assassinated two months earlier (1972 presidential nominee George McGovern was the caretaker for Kennedy delegates at the 1968 convention). There was a highly emotional platform fight over Vietnam policy during the convention itself; when a “peace plank” was defeated, New York delegates led protesters singing “We Shall Overcome.” Once violence broke out on the streets, it did not pass notice among the delegates, some of whom had been attacked by police trying to enter the hall. At one point, police actually accosted and removed a TV reporter from the convention for some alleged breach in decorum.
By contrast, no matter what is going on outside the United Center, the 2024 Democratic convention is going to be totally wired for Joe Biden, with nearly all the delegates attending pledged to him and chosen by his campaign. Even aside from the lack of formal opposition to Biden, conventions since 1968 have become progressively less spontaneous and more controlled by the nominee and the party that nominee directs (indeed, the chaos in Chicago in 1968 encouraged that trend, along with near-universal use of primaries to award delegates, making conventions vastly less deliberative). While there may be some internal conflict on the platform language related to Gaza, it will very definitely be resolved long before the convention and far away from cameras.
Another significant difference between then and now is that convention delegates and Democratic elected officials generally will enter the convention acutely concerned about giving aid and comfort to the Republican nominee, the much-hated, much-feared Donald Trump. Yes, many Democrats hated and feared Richard Nixon in 1968, but Democrats were just separated by four years from a massive presidential landslide and mostly did not reckon how much Nixon would be able to straddle the Vietnam issue and benefit from Democratic divisions. That’s unlikely to be the case in August of 2024.
Chicago mayor Richard J. Daley was a major figure in the 1968 explosion in his city. He championed and defended his police department’s confrontational tactics during the convention. At one point, when Senator Abraham Ribicoff referred from the podium to “gestapo tactics in the streets of Chicago,” Daley leaped up and shouted at him with cameras trained on his furious face as he clearly repeated an obscene and antisemitic response to the Jewish politician from Connecticut. Beyond his conduct on that occasion, “Boss” Daley was the epitome of the old-school Irish American machine politician and from a different planet culturally than the protesters at the convention.
Current Chicago mayor Brandon Johnson, who was born the year of Daley’s death, is a Black progressive and labor activist who is still fresh from his narrow 2023 mayoral runoff victory over the candidate backed by both the Democratic Establishment and police unions. While he is surely wary of the damage anti-Israel and anti-Biden protests can do to the city’s image if they turn violent, Johnson is not without ties to protesters. He broke a tie in the Chicago City Council to ensure passage of a Gaza cease-fire resolution earlier this year. His negotiating skills will be tested by the maneuvering already underway with protest groups and the Democratic Party, but he’s not going to be the sort of implacable foe the 1968 protesters encountered.
The 1968 Democratic convention was from a bygone era of gavel-to-gavel coverage by the three broadcast-television networks that then dominated the media landscape and the living rooms of the country. When they were being bludgeoned by the Chicago police, protesters began chanting, “The whole world is watching,” which wasn’t much of an exaggeration. Today’s media coverage of major-party political conventions is extremely limited and (like coverage of other events) fragmented. If violence breaks out this time in Chicago, it will get a lot of attention, albeit much of it bent to the optics of the various media outlets covering it. But the sense in 1968 that the whole nation was watching in horror as an unprecedented event rolled out in real time will likely never be recovered.
What I am most afraid of are the SC justices that George Bush will appoint if he is re-appointed as president (s)elect. They will impose a total ban on all abortion, no doubt. This will be good for Democrats because that decision would be so unpopular that a Republican would not see office for fifty years. For the many Americans on the left who are craving a Hillary Clinton presidency, don’t count on it. No matter what happens in November with the Bush re-selection, the Republicans are going to sink Hillary’s senate seat if they have to spend their last dollar. Then, make way for Gore in ’08.
If the fat cats and bible beaters get their way, the church will run the state, the nation, and eventually, the world. I believe in Christianity, and I also have a tendency to favor Democracy over Banana Republicanism. To my rural friend Chandler in Kentucky, keep the faith. I have been on an OE (overseas experience) since the onset of the Iraq war in early 2003, teaching English in Southeast Asia. I am now in Singapore, and I want to come back home to Kerry Country next year. Only you good voters can make that happen! If Bush is re-elected then I’m moving to New Zealand, at least it will take him a longer time to drop a bomb there.
Please deliver me my country back and deliver the White House to John Forbes Kerry!!!
Thank you for information !
it is reasonable to suppose the mess in Iraq will only get worse as the election gets close. Some Americans see the handwriting on the wall and the cry for immediate withdrawl, as it finally did when we warred on Vietnam, will become a majority view. John Kerry knows this and from his Vietnam experience must see that absolute withdrawl asap is the best way to end our involvement. After all, again as with Vietnam, whenever we leave the result will be the same. The Iraq that will emerge if we leave today, next year or in ten years will be a tribal/theocratic corrupt coalition of elites. Kerry must come out for withdrawl if he wants the growing and soon to be massive anti-war movement to bring him to the White House.
bush is by a million miles the worst president that this country has ever had. If America elects him then America is lost forever. Goodbye America and goodnight. I cry for our children. I cry for the world.
Ask anyone why they would vote for bush and then confront them with their hypocracy. Use the facts, help them see the truth. Everyone must do what they can to save our country, one vote at a time.
Diebold will make sure that Nader gets a significant
number of Democrat votes,
workingpoor, I appreciate your insight into rural KY. Presumably Louisville is a little different. I once lived in remote parts of Utah. Your story rang a bell for me, though in those days I was far enough out there (pre-satellite) we had no TV and 3 radio stations. In many ways that was a blessing. Your second post gives me hope. “Redneck” had a few progressive facets once. It will be a trick getting that back. Once again thanks.
Reinstitution of the Fairness doctrine should be a major plank of the Democratic platform. It could be implimented by FEC regulations under a Kerry presidency. Also, the licensing should be changed so that consumers have some teeth; compaints from citizens could be investigated and liscenses pulled in a timely fashion. Disabled people like me would LOVE to monitor and document violations if there were a practical proccess for making an impact!
The emerging Democratic majority would pull together much faster if accurate information were freely available to the general public.
I apologize for posting so lengthy a commentary.
I broke it into three parts because I was unsure of the word limit.
The good news is the natives are getting restless anyway. The Bush-Cheney bumper stickers have completely disapeared, as have the “pro-life” billboards and political statements on the lighted signs in front of the chuches. Factory workers are complaining about Health care and low wages and pointedly refusing to discuss politics. (Around here if your politics aren’t redneck, you best avoid the subject.)
Even the proffessionals have no idea whats going on. When asked about problems with the NCLB, legislation, several professional teachers in town drew a blank.
Most people around here smell a great big rat, but they have no informational base to understand why. Discussion is taboo. Questioning is actively discouraged. And they are inundated with propaganda. And I beleive most disaffected people don’t bother to vote.
The only way to break thru is to reinstitute the FEC fairness doctrine (repealed by the Gingrich Congress) and force the media to present both sides and honest news and information.
DennisS-As a dedicated leftwing Dem now living in rural red state Kentucky, I can offer some insight into the question of how Americans can put Bush back into office. A good percentage of people here can’t read and are dependent on the spoken word for information. Rush Limbaugh is available to them 15 hours a week. NPR is useless; they actually censor the All Things Considered standup peices to report only the parts that make Bush look good. Our local Rep. Hal Rogers is lauded glowingly in the local papers when he delivers pork, otherwise is never mentioned. The only television station that my rural area gets is KET public telivision. They play Lou Dobbs and the Leher news, but otherwise it is Lawrence Welk and crafts, hunting and fishing. They show Bill Moyers at 11 on Friday nights, when most of the local population is stoned to the gills or sound asleep. Most rural people don’t have access to cable, and don’t have the credit for sattellite service without a large cost upfront. The preachers around here rant from the pulpit that the Net is the Devil’s work, and around here that is major; if you aren’t a good ‘Christian’ you are ostrasized and unemployed.
Kerry is a joke..he has NO chance about Dubya…People know Kerry will turn our national security over to the crooked, useless UN..
Vote Bush..he is our only hope..
A vote to little liberal kerry is a wasted vote
Seth the Supreme Courts decision was about the re-count, not who won the vote. Had they allowed the real votes to be counted then the electoral count would have given President Gore the election.
No one was challenging the electoral college.
The Supreme Court does not have the power or authority to change the law/system. They only interpret the law and that is what they did in Florida. So the scenario that you quoted could not happen.
John Kerry will be our new President come next November, with the popular vote and the electoral college both to his favor. No Supreme Court crowning/appointment/annointment/ this time.
We should concentrate on them stealing the votes before they are counted, now there’s something to keep an eye on.
Honestly, I don’t know why you bother. Just as the Scalia 5 wrote a very special decision in 2000, one that couldn’t be used as precedent in any other election dispute, they will tailor make a decision again. If Kerry wins the electoral vote and loses the popular vote, the Supreme Court will say that at a time of war and grave national crisis, the country would suffer irreparable harm if the winner of the popular vote was thrown out of office.
It’s inevitable. Bush will be reappointed.
In response to Alan’s question at the top, Gallup talks about “purple” states, in which Bush or Gore won by 5 percentage points or less. I think there were 15 of them: Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Florida, New Hampshire, and Maine. In those 15, the total results in 2000 had Gore ahead by two-tenths of one percent, 17,051,343 to 16,987,908. Gore got 85 electoral votes from those states, and Bush got 84. The next two closest states, Washington and West Virginia, had margins between 5 and 6 percent. So any lead at all in that group is significant, and a lead of 6 or more points indicates the possibility of a sweep, pushing that party up to around 340 electoral votes. I think Kerry has at least an even shot in every one of the 15 except Tennessee.
I hope that you are wright WE in AMERICA need a brake after years of THE REPUBLICAN LIES AND THE LAP DOG MEDIA THERE TO BACK THE REPUBLICANS UP TOO MANY OF TE+THE AVERAGE MAIN STEET AMERICANS HAVE BEEN BLEEDING AND ALL OF THE DYING FOR THE REPUBLICANS.
You heard it here first. Take it to the bank. America will win this election, unlike the last presidential election.
D?
Hah! Maxcat, from your mouth…
I have absolutely no basis in fact for saying this, aside from being a longtime Kerry fan (30+ years) and constituent, but I don’t think in the end it’s even going to be close. I think Kerry wins fairly easily, not a landslide, but not a nailbiter either.
I am going to be more optimistic. A landslide by Kerry will coat tail many democrats into office, is my prediction.
The polls I’ve seen show that Americans would rather have a democratic than a republican in a generic congressional election. The Senate will stay about 50/50, but I think the Dems will gain some ground in the House ’04, regardless of how the Presidential Election plays out.
I’m curious about the effect Bush’s standings will have on the other races. The plan was to stage a quick, victorious war, get a landslide for Bush, and pull a lot of Repugs along on his coattails. That clearly is not going to happen. The race looks tobe extremely close. What affect will that have on the other races?
The Alliance for Justice has launched a new website urging Justice Scalia to recuse himself from the Cheney energy case! Check it out: http://www.ChooseToRecuse.org Scalia can recuse himself anytime before the Supreme Court renders its decision.
There is a great flash animation that goes with it too. You have to see “Quid Pro Quack” http://www.allianceforjustice.org/action/scalia/flash.htm Duck’em!
PoliticalBlogger, well only if we are going to apply the stick equally to everyone. But then again that would mean……………..
Since Jesus isn’t here to give communion to, we had better not go there, if you know what I mean.
So is this “Top Official” polling his local congregation? It’ll save him a lot of time wasted giving communion to all those undeserving.
And let’s not even get started on the bushman.
I heard a tape of bush saying he thought God wanted him to be President. I think he just misunderstood what God said. What He really said was “That He wanted bush to be present”, for his NG duty that is. Hey it was an honest mistake, yeah right.
When you are being shot at and they meanto kill you , you are not woried about THE VATICAN, AND DON’T YOU YOU GO TO HELL FOR LYING
Fred you are right on the money, bush will go down very hard. Keep the faith. My biggest worry is that through the manipulation of polling data and the media, the bushies are working to keep Americans thinking that this race will be close. Why? Well if we all think that the race is close then we will be ripe for a theft, just like in Florida 00. This ain’t no grassy knoll guys.
There is no way in H that our fellow Americans will vote bush for president with everything that he has done. If bush wins then We the People will have been the objects of a Royal screwing.
LETS stacklimbaugh,BUSH ,ROVE, O’NEALL, AND THE REST OF THE COWARDS WAR records up against JOHN KERRY. THEY WERE COWARDS . AND MOST OF THE LAP DOG REPORTERS WERE COWARDS. I am not a hero but I did my duity. AND I DID NOT CLAIM TO HAVE AN INGROWEN HAIR ON MY ASS. AND MY FEET ARE FLAT, BUT I WAS STILL FIT TO GO. THE MEDIA HELPED BUSH LIE NOW OUR TROOPS DIE. I SAY LETS BRAKE UP THE LAP DOG MEDIA AND VOTE BUS BACK TO CROWFORD.
The descrepancy between the national average and battleground states is because Bush’s support in Red states is more than Kerry’s support in Blue States. Therefore, Kerry can be doing better in battleground states than in the nation as a whole. Elections are about the electoral college, not the popular vote. In fact, I recently read an article in The New York Times suggesting that Bush may win the popular vote, and Kerry the electoral college.
Fear not everyone. I have total faith in John Kerry. I was not for him in the primaries, and was actually feeling sorry for him. The joke was on me and a lot of others. Do I have to remind everyone of the political obituaries out there before the actual voting began. Like Kos said the other day, the man knows how to close. This will be a “slam dunk” election. If not, then put to bed Abe’s famous “you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Just look at the record. What kind of people would put this man back in office after the horrific record he’s put up. When push comes to shove, in the voting booth, I can’t see a majority of our fellow citizens pulling that Bush lever. After all, it’s about self preservation, and this gang is destroying this country, and I can’t believe that a majority of the American people could be that dumb. I have a little more faith in them than some. I hope it’s warranted.
Note that the battleground states sample has been determined by Bush’s advertising strategy and excludes 33 states that gives Bush 190 safe EV and Kerry only 168 EV, so Kerry had better be ahead. A more reasonable sample would include Colorado (which has been polling closer than Washington) and Lousiana in the battleground category and would be Bush 172 safe EV, Kerry 168. Striking how the Kerry campaign is letting Bush define the battleground states to the extent that the media and independent polling groups simply accept the Bush sample. Democrats should not.
It seems dEMOCRACY is unfortunately in the hands of UNLIKELY voters. Spain is example of UNLIKELY voters saying enough is enough. I take little comfort in the views of LIKELY voters (traditional).
Here’s a link to the Hotline article:
http://nationaljournal.com/pubs/hotline/h040422.htm#38
I decided to reread Ruy’s book the Emerging Democratic Majority. It gives me further hope for a Dem victory in November. I have done my own calculations of electoral votes and find that Kerry will have 296 without Florida. I really believe the scandal-ridden administration will take a tumble in the polls this summer with the coming out of Wilson’s book and the belief that legally things will begin to happen on this front.
I’ll try and take comfort from your close analysis of the polls and the fact that we’re still a long way from November but I still can’t help being dismayed by my countrymen. You’d think that after recent events in Iraq and the steady stream of revelations, (Clarke et al), every segment of the country would be eager to express their dissatisfaction with Bush. Even if Kerry wins we still have to live next to these people and there are too many to call them a cult. That is the source of my anguish.
Yet a crazed fundie Santorum clone like Toomey is beating the slightly more sensible Specter.
How can you figure PA voters would be any smarter when it comes to the presidential race?
I’ve been working on a Keystone Poll for the Specter/Toomey race. If the responses that I’ve been getting on the calls I’ve made are any indication I think a lot of PA Republicans are not happy with Dubya. When asked about Bush on the Fav/Unfav/Undecided question, a lot are responding undecided. I think PA is going to be more comfortable for Kerry than the polls seem to be indicating.
Elections are won in voting booths in November, not in polls in April.
Fight like hell no matter what the polls say!
Remember everyone:
From January to July of 1992, the presumptive Democratic nominee was polling THIRD behind an incumbent named George Bush (H. Ross Perot was polling second).
Bill Clinton would go on to win the electoral vote 370 to 168, and the national popular vote by 6 percentage points.
Then again, President Harry Truman was behind in ALL polling all the way up to Election Day and still managed a SLIGHTLY comfortable victory margin.
Pins and needles!!! The next 6 1/2 months are going to make the “extended dance remix” that was the 2000 presidential election like childs play.
2.004k.com is a new site that tracks state-by-state polls. Here’s a page showing all races, sorted by trend:
http://2.004k.com/trend/
It shows 17 toss-up states, polling within the margin of error.
Of the remaining states, the tally shows Bush with 196 Electoral Votes, and Kerry with 96.
(and taking a snapshot of recent polls as of 4/22/04, shows Bush with 311 electoral votes and Kerry with 227)
This trend if it continues would lead to a wonderfully ironic result – a Bush popular plurality, a Kerry electoral victory.
The looks on Rove/Limbaugh/Dennis Miller/Zell Miller et al faces would be priceless, and when they spout that Kerry should bend to the will of the people we will all have a good laugh…
I second Raj comments. The Kerry campaign needs to get its “air force” off the ground and counter-attacking. Right now, Bush et al has carpet-bombed the battleground states. The Kerry campaign needs a whole lot more vigor and spirit. Please get kicking Bush’s ass.
Hey,
I think it is important to recognize that there has been an upswing in Bush’s support and these commercials do seem to have some impact. I live in Boston (in the same TV market as Southern NH), and I see dubya commercials all the time misrepresenting Kerry’s record. Where are MoveOn.org’s, ACT, or Kerry’s commercials. What is being done with the money. Anecdotely, speaking to people, I know that Bush’s commercials are having an effect. There is no reason to sugar coat it, the Bush team is not stupid. They know what the hell there doing and we can’t get complacent….
The question is. What were the percentages between President Gore and Mr. Bush in the Battleground States in 2000 compared to what the polls say is the difference today between Kerry and Bush?