powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: matthew dallek joining us now, the author of the burke -- the book "mergers," -- birchers," good morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: how would you put this joe biden seven away from the race

in historical context? guest: the closest omens were harry truman and lyndon johnson, 52 and 68, incumbent presidents eligible to run for another term who said -- nope, i'm not, i'm not doing this again. the other analogy to both of them is that they were very unpopular. truman, february of 1952, 20 2% approval, which is extremely low . lbj, the war in vietnam was a disaster. so, they were very unpopular nationally but also within their own parties. so, the circumstances today i think are very different. biden has obviously been drawn much deeper into the campaign, into the general election, essentially, but he's also obviously quite unpopular it it is that internal party pressure that at least, in part, i think,

drove all three from seeking another term. host: for the other two that you mentioned, was it that unpopularity that was the main driver, or were there other factors? guest: i think that each was unique. truman had been in office for about seven years and was eligible to run, but democrats have control of the white house for 20 years at that point. there was economic, so economic discontent in the country. inflation, joblessness, unpopular price control, and above all the war in korea was a stalemate. that was truman's war. that really settled him as well. and then he was deeply unpopular. he was wounded by losing the new hampshire primary, even though it was nonbinding back then. it was kind of a slap in the face. it was a combination of those forces. lyndon johnson, similarly in the new hampshire primary, even

though he didn't lose it, eugene mccarthy, the antiwar candidate, had a strong showing, and it was a kind of humiliation for johnson. on top of that, the tet offensive of 68 exposed the lie that there was so cold light at the end of the tunnel in vietnam . it was a combination of unpopularity and simply a war, a quagmire that neither president could get the country out of. host: when you saw a key democrats usually calling on president biden to leave the race, small at first, large towards the end, what did you think of key democrats and the party making the push? caller: why were they making it? host: why and especially in the first place. guest: it was extraordinary, my sense was that many of them loved joe biden. not to be overly cliché, but many were huge fans and

supporters of his and they believed in his policies. my sense is that they were very much responding to a couple of things. one, the polls starting to drop, really crater. also, this unifying, really almost hatred for donald trump that kind of intolerance of the idea of a second trump term. so, it was the fear of biden losing to trump and losing badly. that they would not be able to reap -- we take the house or hold onto the senate. it's a pure self-interest involved. i think it was that combination with money drying up as well. it was kind of that perfect storm and ultimately, you know, president biden had some very good events after the debate but also some interviews that left some democrats really unsatisfied that he had quieted concerns. so, biden was never able to

really put the doubts to rest in the weeks after the debate. host: joining us through 9:00 and if you want to ask them questions about the current state of presidential politics, democrats are (202) 748-8000, republicans are (202) 748-8001, an independents are (202) 748-8002. text us your thoughts at (202) 748-8003. what does history tell us about those who take on the mend -- mental the presidents who decided to step away? what does it mean for kamala harris now? guest: this is one of those moments where even though i'm a historian, i'm not sure that history offers us a ton of insights. one that i think we are seeing now that has maybe played out historically is that there is a kind of rally around the person who is thrust into the position of power in a moment of crisis. now, the circumstances are totally different, but harry truman when roosevelt died,

lyndon johnson when john f. kennedy was assassinated, that's not a comparison to biden withdrawing, but there is certainly a sense that within a part of the country, within the democratic party there's a kind of crisis, and i think that what we are seeing now is not just a sigh of relief among voters, but the sense that the crisis maybe continues and we have someone who can us through it. you are seeing that have these kind of temporarily, as they rally around a candidate. it has been surprising, frankly, to watch the outpouring of support in terms of financial, in terms of delegate support, in terms of elected official support, and voter support for vice president harris. host: for the two that you mentioned in history, did they have to go to an open convention? what's the difference between

that and what you are seeing play out? host: that became prep -- guest: that became president. -- precedent. truman had to win that election campaign on his own terms. he almost lost that race. lyndon johnson, kennedy was assassinated in november of 63. lyndon johnson faced voters a year later. so, they had to quickly kind of redefine, both understand their predecessor's legacy and figure out how they were going to carry that on while putting their own stamp on their agenda, their vision for the country, i think that is the balance that vice president harris, even though she isn't assuming the presidency, she is assuming the mantle of leadership for the democratic party and she has to

balance the biden legacy that is partly her own, but also put her own stamp and vision on what her campaign will be about, how she will define her agenda, but four years from now will look like if she wins. we will talk -- host: we will talk about that and a little bit, but first we go to joanna, democratic line, maryland. caller: good morning. i wanted to talk about johnson. it wasn't just the vietnam war that took him down. in his first run, he was supported because the south was solidly democratic, but the dixiecrat's rejected the civil rights bill. he even said -- i lost the south . once he signed the civil rights bill, they all became republicans. so, he didn't have enough democrats to support him after that. it wasn't just the vietnam war. it was a combination of dixiecrat's leaving him and the

vietnam war. host: -- guest: yeah, i think that is an important point, before that dixiecrat's had become to break away from the democratic party. throughout the mid-1960's, post-civil rights, post-voting rights, there were uprisings in the cities. the cities were -- they were on fire. crime was becoming a major concern. so, law & order. lyndon johnson, who had a vision of the great society in 19 64, by 67 and 68, i think a lot of americans across the country were feeling like -- where where -- well, where is that great society, we are not dealing -- seeing it? that was a multiracial reaction. african-americans who did not see enough relief from some of

the challenges that they were facing in terms of poverty, a lot of white americans as well. so, there were other issues, of course, to. but vietnam was, i think, the central driver. without the war, you know, history may well have been very different, including of course in 1968, the convention where we had protests, violence, and bloodshed in the streets. host: lodi, california, independent mind, denise. caller: good morning, can you hear me? host: yes, we can. go ahead. caller: to me, i just don't understand what's happening. i'm trying to find out if it is actually legal, what's going on, because apparently vice president harris never won --

hasn't had any wins. she lost, she left. they put her, it seems like a coronation to me. again and again, it is showing that the framework of the party doesn't listen to the will of the people. they choose whoever they want and do that. in fact i'm not even sure if harris is going to be the one, because it seems like she is doing worse than joe biden. if the issue is about winning, not about what you want, then they are going to put her aside and put somebody else in the can win. please, let me know here where we are, because we are in uncharted territory and i've never seen that before. host: denise, california, thank you. guest: yeah, i've never seen it before either.

we are in uncharted waters. the parties do have plans for something like this. let's say that the nominee were to keel over or have an incapacitating stroke, they have rules for deciding who will replace them. in this case, the nominee, joe biden, has withdrawn. so, the rules are -- and actually, he was the presumptive nominee, not even technically the nominee. the caller is exactly right. biden harris were the winners of 14 million primary votes. given that the primaries are over, it now falls to the 4000 plus delegates at the national convention. many of them are elected officials. members of congress. they are activists. they would pledge to biden but now they have become unpledged, in a sense. so, harris now has a majority of

those delegates. so, i think it is fair to call her the presumptive nominee, but it really is up to these 4000 plus delegates. it's clearly not the same as the 14 million voters, but logically it's the next best thing in an emergency situation. host: and delegates approaching now, it's by voice, not binding. caller: -- guest: yes, not binding, but the majority of the delegates have expressed an intention to vote for her when they do -- the party is going to do a virtual roll call, basically, in a couple of weeks. you never want to say it's a done deal, you never know what's going to happen, but it certainly seems like she is going to be the nominee. host: tiny, texas, republican

mind, good morning. caller: good morning. yes, harris is not going to make a good president. she's got the same policies that biden and the rest of the democrats want. as far as the hearing yesterday, that woman live from the beginning to the end. for me, i think it was a plot to assassinate from the democratic party. host: ok, we are going to leave it there, caller. but to the point that she made about the person, you hinted at it as well, when the vice president goes on, she's got to stick to her own agenda. how much does she stick to her own agenda or big -- stick to the original agenda or become her own person? guest: historically, we have seen the vice president take a pretty different path, often,

depending on themselves, right? the composition of the party? circumstances within the country . truman, for example, presided over the very end of world war ii and obviously launched the war in korea. he had a fair deal. he moved on civil rights, frankly, in a way that franklin roosevelt did not. he put his own stamp on the party and on the country. lyndon johnson, you know, john f. kennedy and in a way, lyndon johnson, he said let him continue after kennedy was assassinated in he embraced many of the kennedy programs but also went a lot further than that in his vision of a great society i think was much more vicious than what kennedy had outlined. johnson had the majority of the congress to get it done.

much of the land lark -- landmark legislation still with us today, like medicare, medicaid, environmental protections, you know, that was lyndon johnson, essentially. i think it's really important that vice president harris is going to be both defending the biden legacy and, especially if she were to win, she would have, i think, very different views on some important issues. we don't quite know what they are yet. i wouldn't say that she is just simply an extension of president biden. host: let's hear from jim in chicago. good morning, you are on with our guest, calling in on the democratic line. hello. caller: my question is about rfk junior being in the discussion, does he hurt trump's chances or harris's chances by still being

in the discussion for president? guest: well, that is an open question. i think it also raises the question of third parties this cycle. because there are several third-party candidates, including jules stein and cornell west. i think that the evidence so far is mixed in the polls have suggested that robert f. kennedy, jr., who has all of these conspiracy theories about vaccines, he has pulled support from both parties. the question, though, is whether the people who might have voted third party or might have sat on their hands and not voted for president, now they have got someone who is not biden and not trump on the ticket. do they come out and support vice president harris? we don't know that, yet, but it could potentially hurt -- higher

elevation into becoming the nominee could potentially eat into some of that support. again, we have to caveat this, we just don't know. rfk junior, who knows he is going to do. he has made rumblings about endorsing trump. will that help trump? we just don't know. host: the current president, what happens to him? he is still president of the united states, obviously, but how does the goal change? guest: it's a great question. the president himself did this phone call, recovering from covid in delaware, did a phone call at the campaign headquarters saying i'm not going anywhere, i have six months left in my presidency and i am going to be out there stumping for you. it's really interesting, though, because vice president harris will surely want president biden's support. they are very linked, both

politically and in terms of their policy record. but because biden has become unpopular, it's going to be trickier for her, right? she's prop -- he's -- she is probably not going to do every rally with the president. she will want to establish her own independence. to think about one example, ronald reagan running for governor in 66, beeri got -- barry goldwater, the 64 nominee that lost in a huge landslide, still popular among conservatives. but reagan did not want goldwater campaigning with him, right? wanted him at arms length and was happy to kind of have a loose endorsement bump but didn't want to stump with him. he wanted to kind of define himself and project his own image and shed some of that more extremist association. so, vice president harris, very

different. it's a balancing act. guest: -- host: a lame duck president now, what could it mean? guest: it could be liberating for him. he's not a lame-duck president -- he is now a lame-duck president, everybody knows that, but he doesn't have a majority in the house and is already limited with what he can do. his legacy as he sees it, of course, is harris winning in november. to the extent that he makes decisions, he will want to make decisions that he thinks is helpful to the country, of course, but also his legacy, and you cannot take politics out of it. it's also going to see liberating as well because they don't have to worry as much about every action through the

lens of him and, frankly, the pressure is alleviated somewhat for him as well. people will not be watching his every word to see if he confuses the president of one country with another. some of under. -- that's some of what he's been under. host: sabrina, the house is coming in in about five minutes. go ahead. caller: ok, first of all, let's start off with this whole thing. the democratic party needs to put forth other candidates besides harris. biden had his own legacy before she came onto the scene. this whole thing is just so messed up. the american people are not going to support her, they are not going to do it. if the democratic party puts her fourth as a candidate, trump has

it in the back. if they want a chance of winning this election, they will have to put forth another candidate. it's going to be groundbreaking because there is no way that the american people are going to vote for her because it's not going to happen. she's [indiscernible] and it's not going to happen. host: she's a what? guest: i think she said foreigner, but that's not true, of course. she's a u.s. citizen. it does raise the question, frankly, of donald trump, if they were to lose, would they accept the results? of course there was chatter at the republican convention that there is no way they can lose without cheating. and obviously it's likely to be a close election no matter what. the democrats probably have a better chance today than they did a few days ago.

obviously, it is a fraught moment, but vice president harris seems to be uniting the democratic party and of tent -- potentially appealing to some of these double hater voters. host: jim, nevada, running short on time, get on it. caller: i was wondering if you might be able to elucidate on what accounts for the degradation of critical thinking among the electorate that would allow a creature like trump to ascend to the national stage to the extent that he has -- guest: look, i think trump, whatever people think of him, donald trump is a very skilled politician and political operator. i think that you cannot just dismiss him as -- he has won the nomination of his party now three times in a row. he even amid covid, and arguably

the disastrous handling of the pandemic, came close to winning reelection. trump has shown that he is masterful the social media. i think he has moved the republican party in a more far right direction on issues like immigration and trade and a number of other america first isolationisms. he's found a real constituency for this in the country. he has tapped into something over the last decade that allowed him to endure. we need to not dismiss the well of popular support that he has found. host: we have about a minute, tell us about your book about the john birch society. guest: this group of the 1960's, conspiratorial, antiestablishment, anti-interventionist, embracing a more kind of explicit racism, helping to establish an

alternative political tradition on the far right. that even though it was seen as extremist, other successors to the movement picked up on it over time and cap the legacy alive, the ideological legacy. they were a part of the larger conservative coalition that in some ways the tea party and now maga, they reflect those ideas. ideas around change, it being about some of the extremist origins to the far-right takeover of the conservative movement. host: the book is about how the john birch society radicalized the american right and is writte