Community Voices features opinion pieces from a wide variety of authors and perspectives. (Submission Guidelines)

50 years later, lessons we should learn from Gene McCarthy’s 1968 campaign

Eugene McCarthy

A country politically divided. A powerful president despised by many. Civil unrest in the streets.

No, I’m not referring to the past few years but rather to 1968. And it was during this month 50 years ago — especially from March 12 through March 31 — that one man and his supporters changed the America political landscape for the months and years that followed. 

Emboldened by one of the finest grassroots campaign in our country’s history, Eugene McCarthy, Minnesota’s senior U.S. senator at the time and better known as Gene, nearly defeated incumbent President Lyndon Johnson in the March 12 New Hampshire primary. Johnson received 49 percent of the vote to McCarthy’s 42 percent. But after the write-in votes from the Republican ballots were all tabulated, McCarthy – often confused with the communist-hunting senator from neighboring Wisconsin with the same last name – came within 524 votes of winning outright. McCarthy’s campaign taught lessons that our electorate would be wise to revisit and from which we could benefit in today’s political climate.

No glad-handing politician

McCarthy wasn’t a traditional political glad-handing candidate, nor often was he a particularly good candidate, but he didn’t need to be. His mere willingness to challenge the war as an official candidate when others would not was enough to offer voters a viable alternative.

His decision to challenge the incumbent president of his own party was rooted in opposition not only to the war in Southeast Asia but also what he considered an abuse of power on the part of the Johnson administration. Too often then and now politicians and would-be candidates are more concerned about their political futures and not about offering real leadership on hot-button issues.

McCarthy and his campaign brought a certain civility to an otherwise incendiary political climate. Instead of protesting the war in the streets as long-haired hippies, young people by the thousands got “Clean for Gene,” cutting their hair and shaving their beards before descending upon New Hampshire and later other states for a well-organized door-to-door campaign. They worked within the system to bring about change through traditional voting mechanisms.

Led by the candidate’s wife, Abigail, women – many concerned about the prospects of their sons going off to war – supported McCarthy as well, marking the first time women became their own bloc of voters. The “Women for McCarthy” group, operating out of the attic in the McCarthy house in Washington, D.C., was an integral part of the candidate’s success and showcased the value of bloc voting.

Victory over Kennedy in Oregon primary

Rob Hahn

McCarthy and his supporters proved their grassroots campaign could even beat a well-oiled political machine flush with cash when McCarthy defeated Bobby Kennedy in the Oregon primary, marking the first time ever a Kennedy lost a political election.

Alas, following the death of Kennedy, McCarthy essentially suspended his campaign. He did not secure the needed delegates for the nomination at that summer’s Democratic convention in Chicago, which is more remembered for the violence in the streets than for the eventual nominee, fellow Minnesotan Vice President Hubert Humphrey.

History has regularly — and wrongly — ignored the impact of McCarthy’s campaign or relegated it to a footnote, though Lawrence O’Donnell’s recent book “Playing With Fire” captures exceptionally well the essence of McCarthy’s improbable and historic campaign of 1968. If not for his success against President Johnson in the New Hampshire primary 50 years ago, it’s unlikely Bobby Kennedy would have entered the race on March 16 or that LBJ would’ve withdrawn from the race on March 31.

If, as Winston Churchill said, “those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it,” then conversely those who don’t take the time to reflect upon history will be unable to learn from its success stories. The McCarthy campaign of 1968 serves as an important reminder that with the confluence of the right issue and candidate democracy can flourish as intended, when voters mobilize to genuinely support a candidate instead of merely voting against the opposition.

Rob Hahn of St. Paul is the director and executive producer of the documentary film “Hi, Gene! Meet the Real Senator McCarthy.” The film was nominated for a regional Emmy© last year and can be streamed for free at 


If you’re interested in joining the discussion, add your voice to the Comment section below — or consider writing a letter or a longer-form Community Voices commentary. (For more information about Community Voices, see our Submission Guidelines.)

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (6)

  1. Submitted by Ray Schoch on 03/16/2018 - 03:25 pm.

    Senator McCarthy

    1968 was my first presidential election (A 1944 war baby, I was a year too young in 1964, and 21 was the legal voting age at the time), and through the many presidential campaigns since then – of Republicans, Democrats and Independents – Senator McCarthy remains the only presidential candidate to whom I’ve ever donated money in any amount.

  2. Submitted by Jeff Michaels on 03/16/2018 - 03:51 pm.

    Gene’s additiional motivation

    Gene McCarthy’s 1968 challenge to LBJ has an additional aspect. In 1964, there was speculation following the JFK assassination as to whether the new president would pick Robert Kennedy as his vice presidential candidate. Such speculation generated considerable interest until RFK removed his name for consideration well before the convention started.

    LBJ needed something to create convention excitement so he listed Hubert Humphrey, Gene McCarthy and Connecticut senator Thomas Dodd as VP possibilities. And he feigned uncertainty regarding his eventual selection to create interest for what would have been a very dull week. All along, Johnson knew he was going to pick Humphrey.

    He did, however, create false hope for McCarthy and his supporters. The junior Minnesota senator felt used and never forgave LBJ. A proud man, McCarthy had motivation to “stick it to LBJ” and challenging him during the Vietnam War provided an excellent opportunity.

  3. Submitted by Harley King on 03/17/2018 - 06:31 am.

    Clean for Gene

    I was an eighteen year old college freshman in the winter of 1968 who shaved his beard and went Clean for Gene. I traveled from Indiana to Wisconsin to campaign for Gene. My father was initially upset because he thought I was campaigning for Joseph McCarthy. My political involvement that year caused me to flunk German because I did not attend classes.

  4. Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/17/2018 - 10:25 am.

    Let’s not forget…

    The Party machine swung against McCarthy, and afterwards built a firewall that was intended to prevent any further challenges of that type in the future. That firewall was on full display when it deployed against Sanders’s.

    • Submitted by Pat Terry on 03/19/2018 - 01:05 pm.


      Also millions more voters chose Sanders’s opponent. And Sanders benefitted from voter-supressing caucuses.

      But firewall.

      • Submitted by Paul Udstrand on 03/20/2018 - 08:16 am.


        THAT Democrats choose a weak and unpopular candidate is not in dispute. The question is why and how that happened. The “lesson” is that it has happened before, and it will keep happening until the Democrats decide to become a liberal political Party that puts popular candidates on the ballot, rather than a moderate republican party that keeps popular liberal candidates off the ballot. Like Clinton, Humphrey lost.

Leave a Reply