Her McGovern Moment

Her McGovern Moment

Hillary Clinton has recognized the value of courting antiwar voters.


For three decades, top Democrats kept George McGovern at arm’s length. Unlike Republicans, who made quick peace with Barry Goldwater after his overwhelming 1964 defeat, prominent Democrats disdained their nominee of 1972. The Democratic Leadership Council echoed GOP warnings about liberal “McGovernism” well into the 1990s.

But a funny thing has happened on the way to the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. Leading contender Hillary Clinton did not merely accept McGovern’s endorsement at a recent Iowa rally. She told the crowd she might find a place in her administration for him. Why is Clinton reaching out to McGovern? She’s smart. The New York senator understands that the 85-year-old McGovern has achieved senior statesman status. Indeed, he jokes, “If everyone who stops me in the airport to say they voted for me in ’72 actually had, I’d have won by a landslide.” But Clinton also knows that support from an early and ardent foe of the Iraq War helps calm concerns among antiwar Democrats who have never warmed to her candidacy.

McGovern cuts Clinton no slack for her 2002 vote to authorize Bush’s Iraq War. But he argues that Clinton understands the war must end. “She said if by any chance Bush were to continue the war that after 2008 she’d terminate it,” he tells doubters. “That’s about all you can expect.” There are plenty of Democrats who expect more, and rightly so; Clinton’s rhetoric about how “the era of cowboy diplomacy is over” sounds fine, but her vagueness on withdrawal from Iraq and her tough talk on Iran raise questions about whether the spurs are really off. That said, Clinton’s recognition of the value of McGovern’s endorsement says something important about the frontrunner: unlike less savvy Democrats, she realizes that the old antiwarrior now stands in the mainstream of her party and the nation.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy