Skip to comments.
Nation: But Can Reagan Be Elected? (Compare to todays Palin!)
Time Magazine, courtesy Organize4Paalin ^
| March 11, 1980
| Editorial
Posted on 08/12/2011 7:55:24 AM PDT by fantail 1952
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-43 next last
Amazing how the more things change, the more they stay the same. Thanks to O4P for bringing this 30+ year old story into focus!
To: fantail 1952; Polybius; Gunn Runner
Hey Guys, here is a rebuttal to your falacious use of current polling data to try and make the weak point that Palin won’t be running because of polling data right now.
To: fantail 1952
Great post, thanks!
BTW, my Parents were staunch Dems, and Reagan was their very first, and only, vote for a Republican...ever!
3
posted on
08/12/2011 8:20:32 AM PDT
by
papasmurf
(War is hell, but not the worst hell. Having a PRES__ENT comes close!)
To: fantail 1952
OK let's compare.
--Reagan, according to this article, was the frontrunner.
--Palin isn't in the race.
--Reagan's nomination, according to this article, seemed inevitable.
--Palin's seems unlikely at best.
--Reagan was a two term governor from CA, which in 1980 had 47 electoral votes--most of any state.
--Palin's AK had 3.
--Today, Cali has 55, still tops.
--AK still has 3.
--Reagan had already run for president, as an insurgent from the right, challenging the establishment moderate.
--Palin ran for VP on the ticket with the establishment moderate.
OK, that was fun.
4
posted on
08/12/2011 8:23:06 AM PDT
by
Huck
(Read Antifederalist Brutus and gain a new perspective on the Constitution.)
To: SoConPubbie
I've (we've!) been telling them this for months. They are so Anti-Palin (though surely God alone knows why) that they cannot see beyond their own pathetic and patently unjustifiable animus.
5
posted on
08/12/2011 8:23:10 AM PDT
by
Gargantua
("Our little pit bull says 'Taste my nightstick!',,, A barracuda in a skin-tight skirt.")
To: SoConPubbie
“National opinion polls continue to show Carter leading Reagan by an apparently comfortable margin of about 25%. They also show that more moderate Republicans like Ford would run better against the President.”
//////.......Sound familiar?
It’s always the same tune.
6
posted on
08/12/2011 8:27:18 AM PDT
by
rbmillerjr
(Hannity is a moron. Done with him. Casey...watch out for Karma you murderous sociopath.)
To: Huck
You won't think it's so much fun when you factor in what you left out.
~Palin is ten times the draw Reagan ever was.
~Reagan did not get paid mammoth amounts of money just to show up at events.
~Reagan could not draw tens-of-thousands of people at the drop of a hat to see him at a rally.
~Reagan was not quoted by the press in six-foot-tall headlines every time he mailed a letter.
Try Reagan times ten, then tell me how much fun you're having. Don't worry, we'll be having enough fun to make up for you bumming out.
8^D
7
posted on
08/12/2011 8:29:34 AM PDT
by
Gargantua
("Our little pit bull says 'Taste my nightstick!',,, A barracuda in a skin-tight skirt.")
To: Huck
You are the devil! (ok that was fun!) I am joking, and you hit the nail on the head, but I hope you have asbestos underwear!
To: Huck
Well... there you go again...
.
Using logic.
.
.
.
The faithful won’t like it.
9
posted on
08/12/2011 8:34:43 AM PDT
by
Lando Lincoln
(But that's just me.)
To: Huck
Published originally in March 1980. 3/80=3/12. Last I heard using this scale, it's still August of 1979. Reagan didn't officially declare until November....
Answering the rest of your crap would be a waste of perfectly good bandwidth.
10
posted on
08/12/2011 8:38:23 AM PDT
by
fantail 1952
(They don't make 'em like Reagan any more. Now it takes a woman to do a mans job!)
To: fantail 1952
Despite the occasional shot at Reagan's imagined simple-mindedness, this is a far more balanced and informative article than TIME has published in many years.
One of his proposed cures for inflation is the notion that a huge tax cut will restore the productive vitality of the economy and control price rises. Most economists believe this approach is nonsense, that it would simply fuel more inflation.
Ha.
11
posted on
08/12/2011 8:40:23 AM PDT
by
Interesting Times
(WinterSoldier.com. SwiftVets.com. ToSetTheRecordStraight.com.)
To: Gargantua
You apparently don’t remember Ronald Reagan very well.
To: Mr. Lucky
You apparently dont remember Ronald Reagan very well. Gargantua maight not, but I do. Voted for him NINE TIMES.
13
posted on
08/12/2011 8:46:36 AM PDT
by
fantail 1952
(They don't make 'em like Reagan any more. Now it takes a woman to do a mans job!)
To: Gargantua
Palin is ten times the draw Reagan ever was.Don't be an idiot.
And I'm a Palin fan.
To: Mr. Lucky
"You apparently dont remember Ronald Reagan very well." LOL
Ronnie grew up on the Rock River in Illinois in my family's town of "Dixon," and went to high school with my dad. He was a lifeguard in the summers at the local beach, and was a family friend until his death. Your luck just ran out.
15
posted on
08/12/2011 8:52:15 AM PDT
by
Gargantua
("Our little pit bull says 'Taste my nightstick!',,, A barracuda in a skin-tight skirt.")
To: M. Thatcher
Prior to his political rise, Ron was a classic "B List" actor who starred in movies with a chimp named "Bonzo." In Hollywood he was a fondly remembered dolt, and in America his "Walk oF Fame" star shone about as brightly as Rip Torn or Dom DeLuise.
By the '60's, Reagan could still draw a crowd of fifty to a couple hundred people if he showed up at a shopping mall, but he couldn't draw fifty-thousand. Grow a brain. Facts are facts.
And I love Ron Reagan.
16
posted on
08/12/2011 8:58:53 AM PDT
by
Gargantua
("Our little pit bull says 'Taste my nightstick!',,, A barracuda in a skin-tight skirt.")
To: papasmurf
BTW, my Parents were staunch Dems, and Reagan was their very first, and only, vote for a Republican...ever!80 or 84 or both? If 84 or both, it would be interesting because it would mean that they liked what they saw from 80-84, but never found another Pubbie inspiring enough to vote for. (I'm sure many of us can relate!)
17
posted on
08/12/2011 9:01:04 AM PDT
by
Still Thinking
(Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
To: Gargantua
Yikes... you’re making stuff up, right?
18
posted on
08/12/2011 9:03:22 AM PDT
by
Lando Lincoln
(But that's just me.)
To: Lando Lincoln
19
posted on
08/12/2011 9:06:24 AM PDT
by
Gargantua
("Our little pit bull says 'Taste my nightstick!',,, A barracuda in a skin-tight skirt.")
To: Interesting Times
Despite the occasional shot at Reagan's imagined simple-mindedness, this is a far more balanced and informative article than TIME has published in many years.That struck me as well. It's been so long, I'd forgotten that Time was once a real magazine written by real semi-objective journalists. I haven't bothered to crack the thing open in decades.
20
posted on
08/12/2011 9:07:20 AM PDT
by
Still Thinking
(Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-43 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson