The problem was getting the nomination. Would the right wing Republicans who vote in the primaries vote for Reagan. Reagan had been elected to multiple terms as president of the Screen Actors Guild. Hollywood then as now was Democrat city. And the Screen actors guild was solidly a Democratic Union. Reagan had campaigned for FDR, HST, JFK and lots of Democrats. It would be as if Ed Asner decided to run as a Republican... Reagan felt there would be a slight bit of skepticism.
What to do...
Then came the bright idea. Main stream Republicans were running as fast as they could away from Barry Goldwater. They knew he was going down... Few wanted to be tarred by the Goldwater brush in 1964.
But Reagan figured that if he spoke for the right wing hero, it would go along way to dampen his RINO image.
So they asked Goldwater.. how would you like a former Democrat union president, hollywood star and famous TV host to speak for you at your convention. They made a deal. Reagan would speak for Goldwater in prime time on national TV.
It was a fantastic speech. The media and the Democrats were aghast. They decided to tar Reagan as a right wing Goldwater clone in an empty suit who read speeches written for him by his handlers.
The funny thing was it worked. The right wing took to Ronnie as one of their own because the media painted him that way. The media also bought their own spin that Reagan was an empty actor reading lines.
In 1966 Tom Brokaw as at KNBC-TV and did an interview show with Reagan. Brokaw said he had prepaired serveral Gotcha's for Reagan. Tom was sure that at the first commerical break, Reagan would have his staff on the set to tell him how to handle the attacks. But when the break came Reagan spent the 3 minutes re-adjusting his perfectly adjusted tie and removing imaginary dust from his perfectly shined shoes.
Browkaw said the show had very good ratings,and the next day tracking polls showed Reagan had climbed two points. Brokaw was certain that the Reagan handlers had managed to figure out all teh gotcha's and fed Reagan the script to handle them.
The point to be made is that to defeat an incumbent a candidate has to get some voters to change their votes. Telling them they were dumb stupid idiots the last time they voted will only harden their support for the other guy.
Reagan showed how to beat an incumbent in 1980.. He did not attack Jimmy Carter. What he did was offer plans and the impression that he would make a better president than Carter. Reagan convinced the voters that he would solve problems. Reagan knew better than to make voters defend their vote for Carter in 1980. He offered himself as a better choice in 1980. He did not try to prove that Carter was a bad choice in 1976.
If you want the boss to fire a someone and hire you in his place, first you have to convince him that you would do a much better job. Leave it to the boss to figure out the current job holder is doing a bad job. The same is true in politics.
You can see examples of how to lose when you study the attempts to defeat FDR and HST. Republicans attacked the incumbent. They were not about how to do a better job. And even in a continued depression FDR won. And in a recession and a screwed up foreign policy situation HST won. You win elections by convincing the voters that you can solve the problems.
It is far better to campaign on how to fix the problems than attack the man that holds the office. Attacks on incumbents do not work.
Reagan knew that... the current crop of Democrats do not.
Great analysis. It has worked against Dean for sure and the rest of them are playing catchup.Thus far, the unannounced Dem candidate has been exceptionally circumspect,ne c'est pas? She gets it - to a point.
Reagan was brilliant in his timing and gutsy as well. He had a firm grasp on reality and what would and could work. What many forget is that the 40 th President was above all, a pragmatic man with a vision.Reagan did put himself and his Presidency on the line for what was important and won most of the time.What losses there were were minor or were turned into small wins .
Though the seque into the present would be easy enough to do,I believe that the unappeasables Reagan derided then will remain so now. Thank you for the timely reminder of just how brilliant Ronald Reagan truly was and how fortunate we were to have had him in office.