Yet he got his tax cuts and defense spending approved.
Do you know how he did it? Reagan made no attempt to convince Tip O'Neil and the democrats that his plan would work. He only convinced him it had public support. The Democrats were convinced that doing what Reagan wanted would be popular at first. But when it failed to work, Reagan would get all the blame and Democrats would win big time. O'Neil reasoned that if he fought Reagan on the issues, the public would blame the Democrats for the international and economic failure were were sure to be under for years. O'Neil was certain the supply side would make it worse and a military build up would make the cold war colder not wamrmer.
From O'Neils perspective it was a choice of who gets the blame... Reagan or the Democrats. He chose Reagon for the blame and gave Reagan the rope to hang himself.
The democrats and the media were totally blind sided when Reaganomics worked. Someone once asked Reagan when he was sure Reaganomics was working. He said, "When the media stopped calling it Reaganomics." They were even more blind sided when his anti soviet policies worked.
The memory of what happened when they Reagan gave Reagan enough rope to hang him self has not paled with time. The Democrats have not forgotten what happened. They did not expect Reagan to use the rope to hang them. But that is what he did. They are not about to give Bush any rope.
That explains in great measure Daschles strong efforts to oppose bush on every front. Daschle will not make the same mistake. He will not give Dubya enough rope to hang them.
They don't understand as Tip did, that by fighting Dubya they will only be hanging themselves.
From 1980 until 1988 Democrats spent a lot of time trashing Reagan. Even as a huge success on all front, he only won in 1984 by something like 56 to 44. Reagans approval ratings rarely exceeded the mid 50's. Reagan was below 50 at this point in his term in office.
The Democrats and the Media kept clinton in the mid 50's by educating the public that crtisizing the President is tantamount to treason, and mean spirited , as well as anit American.
So the new presidential rules the Democrats and media adopted for judging presidents kept Clinton in the 50's and changed how the public judges presidents. The media and Democrats failed to tell the public that those new rules only applied to democrats.
Today the new Clinton rules for presidential support apply to Dubya. And Dubya is solidly in the mid 70's.
It took from 1992 until 1995 to make the new rules work for Clinton. It will take until the end of 2003 to take back the new rules from Dubya.
Democrats can't understand why attacking president Bush is seen by the public as political, unpatriotic and mean spirited.... Do you think we should give them a clue?