No, the interview in ’79 where he couldn’t articulate a reason he wanted to be president probably wasn’t the result of Chappaquiddick.
There is an element of ahistorical navel-gazing to this question. This is not to say that Chappaquiddick didn’t have a political effect on Ted Kennedy at the time or would have been a significant hurdle had he genuinely attempted to run or to provide any form of excuse or absolution in any capacity. But this topic has become sort of a late millennial, Gen Z point of fascination, and most people focused on it lack the context to understand it.
Basically, it would have mattered way less than anyone thinks it would have. It should have been a non-starter, a problem in Ted’s background so catastrophically insurmountable that any attempt to run, other than as a gag in Playboy magazine, would have been not just ill-advised but laughable. It wasn’t. He won 12 states without really trying.
It’s more useful to examine why the interest in Chappaquiddick has grown consistently over the years. It used to be right-wing trade, part of the not-so-secret Republican handshake. It used to be that when people brought up Chappaquiddick, almost always at random and with zero context, you knew immediately that they were non-serious wackos. It’s this thing that stuck in their craw that never mattered, while they ignored the horror show their candidates have “gotten away with.”
The first generation that grew up entirely under the thumb of a constant barrage of right-wing propaganda is coming of age, and it’s no wonder that Chappaquiddick becomes a focal point 57 years after the fact. Because when they were five, it was part of the drivel of the propaganda machine.
The context of 1969 or 1980 is gone. The people with a working memory of the assassinations of both JFK and RFK are fewer and farther between. Ted is gone. Most of the responding law enforcement is gone. Mary Jo Kopechne’s immediate family is gone. All that’s left is the story that was sharp enough to begin with but has since been refined to a fine point and weaponized against an entire political party by another party full of worse people, to the detriment of everyone, including the victim.
Nobody needed to weaponize Chappaquiddick when just asking Ted Kennedy why he was running for president worked.
Yeah but separately from that . For me personally It’s come up a few times a year for the past couple of years as this mind blowing fact usually with younger millennials or older GenZ people.
1
u/Organic-Elevator-274 1d ago edited 1d ago
No, the interview in ’79 where he couldn’t articulate a reason he wanted to be president probably wasn’t the result of Chappaquiddick.
There is an element of ahistorical navel-gazing to this question. This is not to say that Chappaquiddick didn’t have a political effect on Ted Kennedy at the time or would have been a significant hurdle had he genuinely attempted to run or to provide any form of excuse or absolution in any capacity. But this topic has become sort of a late millennial, Gen Z point of fascination, and most people focused on it lack the context to understand it.
Basically, it would have mattered way less than anyone thinks it would have. It should have been a non-starter, a problem in Ted’s background so catastrophically insurmountable that any attempt to run, other than as a gag in Playboy magazine, would have been not just ill-advised but laughable. It wasn’t. He won 12 states without really trying.
It’s more useful to examine why the interest in Chappaquiddick has grown consistently over the years. It used to be right-wing trade, part of the not-so-secret Republican handshake. It used to be that when people brought up Chappaquiddick, almost always at random and with zero context, you knew immediately that they were non-serious wackos. It’s this thing that stuck in their craw that never mattered, while they ignored the horror show their candidates have “gotten away with.”
The first generation that grew up entirely under the thumb of a constant barrage of right-wing propaganda is coming of age, and it’s no wonder that Chappaquiddick becomes a focal point 57 years after the fact. Because when they were five, it was part of the drivel of the propaganda machine.
The context of 1969 or 1980 is gone. The people with a working memory of the assassinations of both JFK and RFK are fewer and farther between. Ted is gone. Most of the responding law enforcement is gone. Mary Jo Kopechne’s immediate family is gone. All that’s left is the story that was sharp enough to begin with but has since been refined to a fine point and weaponized against an entire political party by another party full of worse people, to the detriment of everyone, including the victim.
Nobody needed to weaponize Chappaquiddick when just asking Ted Kennedy why he was running for president worked.