Assessing the Candidates
- Share via
Stewart Udall’s call for a wide-open Democratic convention (“Democrats’ ‘Pilots’ Must Chart Course,” Op-Ed Page, March 24) provoked this thought:
Presidential elections in this century show the Republicans can win with mediocre candidates, the Democrats cannot.
Besides the Watergate-skewed 1976 election, the Democratic Party has won only by nominating candidates who could stir the passions of Democrats, capture them, make them cry and laugh and feel every emotion in between.
Since Robert Kennedy, Democrats haven’t come close to loving any of their presidential candidates. We Democrats deserve to, even if it takes acknowledging the announced candidates don’t fit the bill.
Contrary to Democratic Party Chairman Paul Kirk’s “unite-at-any-cost” philosophy, a little divisiveness that produces a candidate who captures Democrats’ souls is far better than marching lock-step to another Kirk-engineered defeat.
PAUL DE MARCO
Los Angeles
More From the Los Angeles Times
Podcasts
The latest effort is coming from the L.A. County Board of Supervisors. They just announced a $3 million program in conjunction with some nonprofits groups to test and clean the soil at homes still standing in the areas impacted by the Eaton Fire.
California once bet big on offshore wind to help power its clean-energy future, but the Trump administration is now paying developers billions to walk away from their projects. As California’s remaining offshore-wind leases hang in the balance, the state is fighting back in court.
The Hillside Strangler murders terrorized Los Angeles in the late 1970s. The killers were a pair of sadistic cousins. One confessed. The other was set to stand trial—until L.A. prosecutors flinched.
