I remember March, 1980 very well. The GOP hated Reagan. They said he didn’t have a chance to defeat Carter. He was going to start WWIII. He was going to destroy the environment. The GOP was desperate to dump him, and tried to draft Gerald Ford.
10 Mar 1980, Page 5 – at Newspapers.com
There is, in my mind, one crucial issue in this campaign.
Who can take control of US policy back away from the US National Academy of Sciences ?
My message to the AGU President and the NAS President requesting permission to meet openly in public with their members to receive and openly respond to experimental evidence the Sun is the pulsar remnant of a supernova that made our elements and birthed the solar system 5 Ga ago – was deleted without reply.
This suggests that the AGU and NAS (National Academy of Sciences) have in fact taken control of US policy on geo-engineering of planet Earth. That is what former President Eisenhower warned about in his farewell address to the nation in January 1961:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GOLld5PR4ts
Trump has the arrogant personality to do that, but Cruz has the keen intellect to realize the US National Academy of Sciences has taken total control of US policy, exactly as President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned might happen in January 1961.
Not so much arrogance as just plain balls. When you don’t care what people say about you, it gives you a lot of power. Of course, you do need to care and that’s why Trump is tampering down the rhetoric…. I can’t wait to see his massive marketing campaign begins for African Americans…. That is the only way he wins this election.
You are forgetting about John B. Anderson, who ran as an independent, and split the vote with 6.6% of the popular vote. 😉
Feeling that his time in the House was coming to an end (because of elements of boredom, restlessness, and his unwillingness to face the indignity of other challenges to his leadership position and House seat), Anderson began considering other options soon after the 1976 presidential campaign. While many urged him to run for the Senate seat held by Adlai Stevenson III (even after Stevenson dropped out of the race), Anderson had higher sights: the Republican presidential nomination. In 1978, he ran a true exploratory, finding little public or media interest. Anderson postponed his decision to run, lost his campaign manager, and struggled to raise money, but in late April 1979 he made the decision to enter the Republican primary anyway, joining a crowded field that included Robert Dole, John Connally, Howard Baker, Harold Stassen, George H. W. Bush and Ronald Reagan.
He did not fare much better as an announced candidate in the summer and fall, but the last six weeks of 1979 saw a modest reversal of his fortunes. He introduced (as congressional legislation) his signature campaign proposal, advocating that a 50-cent a gallon gas tax be enacted with a corresponding 50% reduction in social security taxes. This idea, while not broadly supported, was hailed as interesting and innovative. Experts agreed that it would reduce consumption dramatically and cost average families nothing if they drove less than about 18,000 miles a year, depending upon the fuel efficiency of their vehicles…
This set off a controversy. Carter said that he would not appear on stage with Anderson, and sat out the debate, which hurt the President in the eyes of voters. Reagan and Anderson had a debate in Baltimore on September 21, 1980. Anderson did well, and polls showed he won a modest debate victory over Reagan. But Reagan, who had been portrayed by Carter throughout the campaign as something of a warmonger, proved to be a reasonable candidate and carried himself well in the debate. The debate was Anderson’s big opportunity. He needed a break-out performance, but what he got was a modest victory. In the following weeks, Anderson slowly faded out of the picture with his support dropping from 16% to 10–12% in the first half of October. By the end of the month, Reagan debated Carter alone and Anderson’s support continued to fade. Although Reagan would win a sizable victory, the polls showed the two major party candidates closer (Gallup’s final poll was 47–44–8) going into the election and it was clear that many would-be Anderson supporters were now supporting their second choice. In the end, Anderson finished with just under 7% of the vote.
Most of Anderson’s original support came from Rockefeller Republicans, who were more liberal than Reagan, but it bled away. Many prominent intellectuals, including the author and activist Gore Vidal, All in the Family creator Norman Lear, and the editors of the liberal magazine The New Republic, also endorsed the Anderson campaign. He also had the support of many independents. Cartoonist Garry Trudeau’s Doonesbury ran several strips sympathetic to the Anderson campaign. According to the recently published journals of Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., former First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis voted for Anderson, as did Schlesinger himself. Although the Carter campaign feared Anderson could be a spoiler, Anderson’s campaign turned out to be “simply another option for frustrated voters who had already decided not to back Carter for another term. Polls found Anderson voters nearly as likely to list Reagan as their second choice as Carter.”
Anderson did not carry a single precinct in the country. Anderson’s finish was still the best showing for a third party candidate since George Wallace’s 14% in 1968 and the sixth best for any such candidate in the 20th century (trailing Theodore Roosevelt’s 27% in 1912, Robert LaFollette’s 17% in 1924, Wallace, and Ross Perot’s 19% and 8% in 1992 and 1996, respectively).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Anderson
‘This Will Be The End Of Trump’s Campaign,’ Says Increasingly Nervous Man For Seventh Time This Year
http://www.theonion.com/article/will-be-end-trumps-campaign-says-increasingly-nerv-52002
Comparisons to Reagan are a disingenuous play to tie Reagan’s recognized political success with an unaccomplished politician, Trump. Reagan had a deeply imbedded foundation in conservative ideology and political success as a governor that demonstrated to the American public the roots of his approach to executive office. He was a excellent communicator of those conservative values and their benefits for the nation.
Trump is a self-aggrandizing opportunist with no executive political experience and New York liberal roots, supporting Schumer, Clinton and a raft of liberal Democrats. He’s latched into the anger of the populous regarding the lawless immigration problem, the out of control spending and failure of the Congress to act to halt the current trajectory of the nation. There is nothing to suggest that he would actually govern with any respect to the conservative ideals of the Republican party or Reagan–He’s a RHINO. His efforts have been fully supported by the media to focus the discussion only on Trump and if he should succeed in getting the nomination, will allow the Dems to open the same playbook used to smear Romney in 2012–rich, elitist with no regard for the working man, old-white-racist who steals from the poor. With Trump they also get the bonus attacks as a philander and misogynist with low moral character.
Trump’s biggest wins are in the open Primaries where the Dems can cross over to vote for the Rep that Hillary can most easily beat, with the fall back option that he’ll govern as a liberal RHINO as a worst case scenario. It win-win for the liberal Dems.
Crashex…. It is RINO not RHINO.
Republican In Name Only. A RHINO is an animal in Africa.
So much for your credibility.
And I’m a Canadian fcs.
Yes, it’s always best to concentrate on some petty minutia. Since Trump behaves like a belligerent bull in a china shop, as well as a republican in name only, maybe my misspelling is more apt.
Thanks for your Canadian f* insight.
Only because it fits this comment;
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/03/the-rino-in-the-race.php
Crashex, you nail it perfectly! Thanks!
No comparison. Reagan wasn’t a lying, foul-mouthed bully who was promising to ignore the Constitution, expand government, and continue to grow the Imperial Presidency. It was those characteristics that set him (far) apart from Trump – not rejection by the GOP elite – that eventually led him to the White House.
You are talking about same Reagan who sold arms to Iran, promoted the ban on semi-automatic rifles, banned sales of automatic rifles, and was governor of America’s most liberal state?
And signed off on a mass amnesty program for illegal aliens in the US.
Actually with the promise from Democrat Party to enforce immigration laws… Of course, Democrats lied as usual.
Hey Lou! Yes, absolutely, the Dems cannot be trusted, no argument. On the other hand, the President is responsible for enforcing the laws; that is his primary job as executive, and Republican Reagan was the President. Do I need to ask what happened after Republican Bush Sr. took office? He did not enforce the laws. Of course Democrat Clinton did not enforce the laws either. And then Republican Bush “W” did not enforce the laws. And now Democrat Obama is not enforcing the laws.
I see a pattern, and it is not a pattern where the Republicans enforce the laws and the Democrats do not. Conservatives often ridicule the Dims for blaming everything bad on Bush. “Bush did it! It is his fault!” Pot. Kettle. Black.
It is difficult, but we conservatives have to face up to the facts. Just like the liberals have been repeatedly lied to and snookered by the Dims, conservatives have been lied to and snookered by the Repubs. It is not fun to admit it, but the truth sometimes hurts. The only way to fix this nation is for We The People to admit that we have been scammed by the most accomplished liars in the world, liars who run BOTH parties.
Hey Crashex and stjones! You may be reading too much into Tony’s comparison, just as Trump(et)ers have read too much into comparisons of Trump and Hitler. In both cases, the comparisons I have heard were about nationalistic support and polling, and not about ideology or principes,
well, we’ve tried everything so far but a businessman….
peanut farmer, movie star, professional politician, community organizer, rancher…..
…if they were applying for a job, none of those would work on a resume
…plus, all the wrong people are telling me not to vote for Trump
Herbert Hoover was a businessman who waffled on party affiliations.
Yes! I quite agree with your reasoning, Latitude. Both points. I am voting for “hope and change” again which just might happen with Mr. Trump. Saving this country is going to be an uphill slog, and the politicians have so far failed massively. My thought is no politicians, no lawyers with their slick, prepared oratory. I was a Democrat until the Environmental NGOs took over and Obama was elected. I regret to tell that I voted for him the first election. I became an Independent very shortly, a few months, after when he revealed himself for the racist traitor that he is. By 2012, I was a Republican and voted the first and, so far, only straight ticket of my long life. Most of the candidates turned out to be RINOS, a term I didn’t even know until the last couple of years. I worry for Trump’s safety. The opposition, both parties, are evil. I should add that I also voted for Romney, but don’t think my instincts are failing me this time!
I’m having a hard time getting this to post. Hope it is just my cold hands.
+1 Barbara!
Wow, perfect post.
Additionally they say President Obama could not pass a required CIA security clearance if he were applying for a job, since all his records are sealed.
It is time for America to go back to how the Founding Fathers wanted this country to work. Enough with these career politicians.
Like Reagan, Trump is an excellent communicator and is tapping into a lot of energy and patriotism from the disaffected white, working class (AKA Reagan Democrats). He also has a similar way of not rhetorically pussy footing around with foreign adversaries. He will certainly give them something to think about if they try to mess with us. A bit of fear when we are dealing with ISIS or even Putin is not necessarily a bad thing.
Reagan gave lip service to cultural issues, but did not spend a lot of political capital on them. I believe that Trump is very similar in that regard. He will definitely nominate good, conservative justices to the Courts.
I obviously don’t think Reagan and Trump are exactly alike, but there are enough similarities that the Republicans would be foolish to reject a once in a generation candidate like Trump at this point. If they rally around him and accept his inevitable nomination, they have an excellent chance for a landslide victory in November.
all this blah blah from republicans…
Reagan tried to join the communist party….was a democrat…..and won the republican election
“Reagan tried to join the communist party…”
Speaking of blah blah blah, that urban legend is a favorite of those who have a deep-seated, confirmation bias-based wish to portray Reagan as stupid, incompetent, or whatever unflattering description they can come up with. If anything, according to this LAT article and other sources, he may have been an informant for the FBI on suspected communist activities within the entertainment industry:
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/12/opinion/la-oe-meroney-reagan-20101212
As for once being a Democrat, as he often said, he didn’t leave the party, the party of Truman and JFK (“Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”) left him.
The latest [joke] I heard is that Canada is considering building a wall at their borders with USA to keep the people (take a guess who??) that are fleeing from Trump’s regime out ……
Note that the support of Rubio and Cruz together In Florida is bigger than that of Trump. Rubio should step out now and become Cruz’ running mate.
Climate science math …
That’s just great…..now what about the rest of the country that’s never heard of Rubio
Little Marco is a FRAUD.
Cruz will win the nomination
Thank God for people like eliza.
Trump must fall.
Look how he lets the people in his meetings make pledges….There is another Hitler for you in the making there.
Nutiness
he picked it up from the democrats
Henry P. Yikes, I hope you are kidding.
I am a Trump supporter, however I will vote for anyone who will win over the Criminal and the Socialist.
I have been following the political discussions here with interest.
As I am currently not a citizen of the country where I reside there have actually been only a few times that I voted. However, in all cases that I did vote, I felt betrayed afterwards, as the party/person that I voted for, actually traded some of my ideals/principles with other parties in order to rule [gain power].
From those few experiences I did have on voting, I concluded that it would be much better for people to be able to vote on issues, rather than for people and parties.
With the increase in connectivity [internet] that we currently have it should be a lot easier now to be able to vote on issues.You tune into the discussion in parliament/congress and you vote when or before they vote. Just so they know [in parliament / congress] how we feel….. How difficult can it be to get this simple idea applied?
Unfortunately, I am sure that we will never get this simple principle of democracy in place, at least not in our lifetimes. Perhaps in Utopia (Heaven).
Lately, more and more money and power is getting into fewer hands {Trump is most lately a typical example] , ultimately leading to…….?
Do your arithmetic.
(Vote for the person who has no hand on big money?)
I will not be voting for the booger eater that scares even his own children.
What will Macomb County Reagan Democrats do on November 8?
http://i65.tinypic.com/2lvkbcp.png
I have been following the political discussions here with interest.
As I am currently not a citizen of the country where I reside there have actually been only a few times that I voted. However, in all cases that I did vote, I felt betrayed afterwards, as the party/person that I voted for, actually traded some of my ideals/principles with other parties in order to rule [gain power].
From those few experiences I did have on voting, I concluded that it would be much better for people to be able to vote on issues, rather than for people and parties.
With the increase in connectivity [internet] that we currently have it should be a lot easier now to be able to vote on issues.You tune into the discussion in parliament/congress and you vote when or before they vote. Just so they know [in parliament / congress] how we feel….. How difficult can it be to get this simple idea applied?
Unfortunately, I am sure that we will never get this simple principle of democracy in place, at least not in our lifetimes. Perhaps in Utopia (Heaven).
Lately, more and more money and power is getting into fewer hands {Trump is most lately a typical example] , ultimately leading to…….?
Do your arithmetic.
(Vote for the person who has no hand on big money?)
Just so we all be clear: Trump is not interested in giving [love]
Trump is only interested in taking [power]
Prove me wrong?
Really, Henry?
Ditto on Really, Henry?
As of a few minutes ago the National Debt is $19,108,366,945,0101, you think the Criminal, the Socialist, and any of the current elected candidates running will change this? I don’t know if Trump will either, but having a successful businessman try is a better bet than the rest of the pack.
Who said Trump wants to give love? Are you for real? Trump is a Billionaire, you think he took this race on for power? He is a man who is worried about where America is headed, he has children, grandchildren who he wants to be sure are able to live and prosper in this country long after he is gone. I think this is what the majority of Americans want.
People voting the same tired, hackneyed characters in over and over again is . . . . .
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” – Albert Einstein
I agree with most of your points but I also believe Cruz is the way more reliably conservative anti-establishment candidate. I’m just tired of Henry’s nonsense.
President expected to give “love”? Candidate only interested in “power”? Prove the negative? Prove Henry wrong?
I admire Tony’s tolerance but, by definition, it comes at a price.
Clearly Trump is playing you all
manipulating you
by translating you fears and fabricating “his solutions”
Surely, you cannot be serious about wanting a build a wall between USA and Mexico?
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2016/03/09/ive-heard-it-all-before/#comment-574464
HenryP – why do you put random line breaks in your comments. Your comments are generally nutty, and this confirms your nuttiness.
Clearly the wall should be built on the northern border.
Agreed!
I felt at home here on this site, with a common sense approach towards the global cooling/global warming/climate change hoax. But as a conservative I feel sad now with this trashing of Reagan – the most honorable, decent, kind, conservative and best president since Abraham Lincoln and later Calvin Coolidge. The closest we come to Reagan these days is Ted Cruz. And Cruz has also, by far, the best and most consequent and sound approach towards the above mentioned hoax.
Goodbye, and all the best to you all.
never say never
Steady does it, John. I agree with you about Reagan and I also consider Cruz the closest approximation we have. I do wish though he would avoid own goals but it’s true that Reagan had besides his natural talent also way more training in the public arena of a politically difficult state.
Hey John! “But as a conservative I feel sad now with this trashing of Reagan – the most honorable, decent, kind, conservative and best president since Abraham Lincoln and later Calvin Coolidge.”
In spite of some points I have made, I actually agree with much of what you say. Was Reagan perfect? No, of course not — but I would trade him in a heartbeat with anyone we have had since in either party. My suspicion (and I do not claim to have proof) is that MUCH of what Reagan did the result of a do-or-die arrangement. He was slated to be assassinated only three months into his first term and only survived by a miracle. Afterwards he was severely constrained in what he was allowed to do — or he would be killed. Crazy conspiracy? Could be… But politics is not softball and such things do, in fact, happen. Anyway, I rather like Reagan. I wish he was back, in his prime, and actually in control of the Executive Branch. I doubt that any President since Eisenhower has had a lot of control over the Executive Branch, but rather the Executive Branch has had control over the President.
Just one crazy opinion…
Well, all the other candidates can just pack it in and go home, Trump has finally announced his VP…
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CMW–wrWgAA2NAB.jpg
Ja
he just gave Ben Carson a nice government job to prove that he is not “a racist”
which of course, he is, as we all know here
There are two kinds of individuals with a nasty streak in their characters. Those who try to overcome or at least hide it, and those who enjoy to flaunt it.
Do you know in which group you are, Henry?
Are you trying to say that Trump did not distance himself from the endorsement by the KKK?
I don’t look how a person looks, I look how he acts…
let me re=phrase:
Trump has not distanced himself from the KKK
Henry, you have a serious reading comprehension problem. When I am trying to say something I say it. Since I was not trying to say what you implied I didn’t say it.
Is the difference clear now?
“as we all know here”
Henry, thankfully, by no stretch of imagination do YOU bear any relationship to WE here.
Live with it.
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2016/03/09/ive-heard-it-all-before/#comment-574433
NOUN;
1.a small, slender carnivorous mammal related to, but smaller than, the stoat.
2.a deceitful or treacherous person.
“he was a double-crossing weasel”
synonyms: scoundrel · wretch · rogue · swine · bastard · creep ·
[more?]
Cannot believe the guys here who fall for a weasel like Trump.