Like Ike? A Trump presidency could mirror Eisenhower

With swing-state polls reportedly driving some nervous Hillary Clinton supporters to check out housing prices in Canada, attention is turning to what many in both parties thought the impossible -- a Donald Trump presidency and what it might look like.

Though the temperament and personality hardly match, there are enough parallels between the high-energy business tycoon and Dwight D. Eisenhower to make the avuncular Ike's Oval Office tenure six decades ago a predictor of a Trump presidency's features.

The World War II hero and five-star Army general credited with winning the war in Europe wasn't rigidly ideological any more than Mr. Trump. Neither man had dipped a toe in the choppy water of U.S. politics before running for president. Both were highly successful at their chosen lines of work.

"Trump has staked out positions that do not allow him to be pigeonholed ideologically -- that makes him more akin to an Ike figure certainly," said Eric Hargan, who was Health and Human Services Department COO under President George W. Bush.

(1) Reagan and Eisenhower got along well, with Ike writing letters of advice and good wishes to Reagan beginning when he ran for California governor in 1966.

(2) The proximate cause of the expansion of the federal government in the 1960s was LBJ’s landslide election victory in 1964 against Goldwater. The large Democratic majority gave LBJ the power to override opposition within his party and from the much diminished GOP contingent.

(3) MacArthur’s war plan against China does not seem to have gone beyond taking all of Korea up to the Yalu River, nuclear bombardment of major Chinese air bases, and a naval blockade. It would have required US war mobilization and its attendant costs, risked blanketing Japan with fallout, and still would not have been enough to procure suitable terms from the Chinese.

(4) Chiang merited US support on Taiwan but his well-demonstrated defects made him implausible as a liberator of the Chinese mainland. For most of the Chinese people, he offered nothing but more of the stagnation, poverty, and brutal oppression of traditional China.

(1) Eisenhower’s record on spending. Imagine how much better we would be off today if, beginning in the 1950s, a national consensus had developed that: (a) increases in domestic government spending would be permitted only as the economy and revenues grew; and (b) that the reduction of high tax rates and of regulatory burdens would thereby permit absolute spending increases even as the relative share of government spending stayed the same or decreased.

In any event, Eisenhower era educational spending was mostly for defense related purposes: the GI Bill; the ROTC program; and, especially after Sputnik, for scientific and technical research and training. As for the bad stuff with the Interstate Highway Program, it mostly came in the 1960s and was usually due to direct political interventions initiated by state and local figures.

By way of contrary example, a few years back, I was able to use federal highway officials to help block a bad local toll road project by publicizing their heavy terms for a connection to the local Interstate. This upended much of the claimed justification for the project and eventually helped spur its defeat.

(2) Eisenhower and McCarthy. If you want the name of someone harmed by McCarthy style allegations, here is one, off the top of my head: Cord Meyer. In 1953, Meyer, a decorated Marine who had lost an eye in WW II due to a combat wound, was working for the CIA. A believer in UN style world government, Meyer came under attack by the FBI, which claimed that he was a security risk for having once stood at the same podium as a notorious leftist. Meyer’s security clearance was held up, but an internal CIA inquiry summarily dismissed the claims.

(3) Taft versus MacArthur. Not only was MacArthur not a shrinking violet, but he was vain, sometimes weird and venal, and surrounded by often incompetent sycophants. He would have proven unsuited to public office.

(4) Ike’s Supreme Court appointments. On this, Taft, a brilliant lawyer, would probably have done a better job. Eisenhower seems to have trusted too much to assurances from his aides, associates, and nominees.

"Reagan and Eisenhower got along well, with Ike writing letters of advice and good wishes to Reagan beginning when he ran for California governor in 1966."

Did the well wishes extend to an outright endorsement ? I would think Ike would strongly prefer the left-wing ex-San Francisco Mayor George Christopher in the primary, who had all the establishment support (and who would've promptly lost to Pat Brown).

"The proximate cause of the expansion of the federal government in the 1960s was LBJ’s landslide election victory in 1964 against Goldwater. The large Democratic majority gave LBJ the power to override opposition within his party and from the much diminished GOP contingent."

True, but had Ike given strong assistance to Nixon in 1960, this all need not have happened.

"MacArthur’s war plan against China does not seem to have gone beyond taking all of Korea up to the Yalu River, nuclear bombardment of major Chinese air bases, and a naval blockade. It would have required US war mobilization and its attendant costs, risked blanketing Japan with fallout, and still would not have been enough to procure suitable terms from the Chinese."

If the end result was the full liberation of Korea and a weakened China, it was worth pursuing.

"Chiang merited US support on Taiwan but his well-demonstrated defects made him implausible as a liberator of the Chinese mainland. For most of the Chinese people, he offered nothing but more of the stagnation, poverty, and brutal oppression of traditional China."

And yet, that would pale in comparison to the tens of millions murdered by Mao.

"Eisenhower’s record on spending. Imagine how much better we would be off today if, beginning in the 1950s, a national consensus had developed that: (a) increases in domestic government spending would be permitted only as the economy and revenues grew; and (b) that the reduction of high tax rates and of regulatory burdens would thereby permit absolute spending increases even as the relative share of government spending stayed the same or decreased."

One thing was clear: we should've had a Balanced Budget Amendment long ago. Unfortunately, the left wing in this country seems to think massive spending and debt is A-OK. I've talked with some that literally cannot grasp that trillions in debt and far beyond that in unfunded liabilities is even a problem.

"In any event, Eisenhower era educational spending was mostly for defense related purposes: the GI Bill; the ROTC program; and, especially after Sputnik, for scientific and technical research and training. As for the bad stuff with the Interstate Highway Program, it mostly came in the 1960s and was usually due to direct political interventions initiated by state and local figures."

Defense, of course, being one of the few things explicitly spelled out that falls under federal purview. Still, Ike's infamous "military-industrial complex" speech exploded leftist paranoia beyond all comprehension.

"By way of contrary example, a few years back, I was able to use federal highway officials to help block a bad local toll road project by publicizing their heavy terms for a connection to the local Interstate. This upended much of the claimed justification for the project and eventually helped spur its defeat."

Not to say I oppose the highway program, my argument was more to do with placement and being punitive towards poor and Black urban neighborhoods where many were run through. Some of this was done in the name of "urban renewal", which was a federal-led initiative with disastrous consequences and the wholesale loss of viable neighborhoods and irreplaceable architecture.

"If you want the name of someone harmed by McCarthy style allegations, here is one, off the top of my head: Cord Meyer. In 1953, Meyer, a decorated Marine who had lost an eye in WW II due to a combat wound, was working for the CIA. A believer in UN style world government, Meyer came under attack by the FBI, which claimed that he was a security risk for having once stood at the same podium as a notorious leftist. Meyer’s security clearance was held up, but an internal CIA inquiry summarily dismissed the claims."

McCarthy did not explicitly name Meyer, so that doesn't really address what I asked. Meyer was an odd person, anyhow, and that business surrounding the strange murder of his ex-wife who was having an affair with JFK was even more bizarre.

"Not only was MacArthur not a shrinking violet, but he was vain, sometimes weird and venal, and surrounded by often incompetent sycophants. He would have proven unsuited to public office."

Leaders often have their quirks, still nothing to disqualify him from high office. He certainly wouldn't have stood idly by in the 1960 elections as the outgoing President (my hope was that in 1956, President MacArthur would have chosen Dewey's 1944 running mate for VP, Ohio ex-Governor and (by '56) Senator John Bricker, an excellent Conservative. Bricker, sadly, was one of the dozen+ losses in the horrific '58 elections. He'd have made an excellent Conservative President for the 1960s and would've put us on a far different course for the future).

"Ike’s Supreme Court appointments. On this, Taft, a brilliant lawyer, would probably have done a better job. Eisenhower seems to have trusted too much to assurances from his aides, associates, and nominees."

He'd have only had time to appointed Vinson's successor as Chief Justice, perhaps the aforementioned Sen. John Bricker himself, Taft's seatmate. If he had remained until his death, he'd have had a whopping 33 years as Chief Justice (1953-1986).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.