Posted on 09/17/2015 7:25:13 AM PDT by IChing
Most Republicans running for president have only one idea: Be like Reagan!
Unfortunately, they seem to remember nothing about Reagan apart from the media-created caricature of a slightly addled old man who somehow mesmerized an imbecilic public with his sunny optimism.
Jeb! goes around saying, "I believe we're on the verge of the greatest time to be alive."
Marco Rubio answered a question in the first debate about God and veterans, saying: "Well, first, let me say I think God has blessed us. He has blessed the Republican Party with some very good candidates. ... And I believe God has blessed our country. This country has been extraordinarily blessed. And we have honored that blessing. And that's why God has continued to bless us."
John Kasich responded to a question at the New Hampshire presidential forum about why he was running, saying: "Well, Jack, look, we're all -- we -- I've received blessings. Most of us here have been very, very blessed, and when you get that way, you have to figure out what your purpose is in life to make the world a little better place."
They all sound like Barney, the purple dinosaur, singing, "I love you, you love me!"
The other problem with the Be Reagan strategy is: It's not 1980 anymore. Reagan's election is as far away today as the defeat of Hitler was then.
Gov. Scott Walker's answer to whether he'd invade Iraq, knowing "what you know today," was: "I'd point out that in the overall issue of foreign policy, I'd say in my lifetime, the most impressive president when it came to foreign policy was a governor from California."
What does that even mean? Is he going to invade Grenada, fund the Contras and put missiles in Western Europe? Back in 1996, when Bob Dole said, "I'm willing to be another Ronald Reagan, if that's what you want," at least people laughed.
When Moammar Gadhafi was under siege in 2011, Rick Santorum said: "Ronald Reagan bombed Libya. If you want to be Reaganesque, the path is clear."
On the other hand, in the quarter century since Reagan bombed Libya, Bush invaded Iraq, prompting Gadhafi to end his WMD program, invite in U.N. weapons inspectors, and pay the families of the Lockerbie bombing victims $8 million apiece.
Nonetheless, "bomb Libya" is exactly what our feckless commander in chief did. Obama sent American troops to participate in the NATO bombing of Libya -- which helped oust Gadhafi, which led to Islamic lunatics running the country, which led to the murder of four Americans, including our ambassador, in 2012, and the refugees flooding Europe today.
Formulaic applications of Reagan's policies from the 1980s don't always work the same way they did in the 1980s. (Similarly, Duran Duran's new single was kind of a dud.) I used "What Would Reagan Do?" as a joke back in 2005; these guys think it's an actual governing philosophy.
When Reagan was running (three and a half decades ago), there was a real fight in the Republican Party over abortion, the Equal Rights Amendment, guns and foreign policy. Reagan had to face down elements in his own party to be pro-life, anti-ERA, pro-gun and to pursue an aggressive anti-Soviet foreign policy.
Reagan won. It's over. The ERA is gone. The Soviet Union is gone. The GOP is unquestionably the party of life and the Second Amendment. (If only fetuses could get their hands on a gun!)
Ever since the hero of 9/11, Rudy Giuliani, couldn't get out of the starting gate in his presidential bid because he was pro-abortion and anti-gun, no serious Republican candidate is ever going to waver on those two issues again.
So why did Marco Rubio find it necessary to stress that he opposed abortion even in cases of rape and incest at the first GOP presidential debate? Did he not live through that whole Todd Akin thing, like the rest of us?
Today, the fight in the Republican Party isn't over abortion, guns or the Sandinistas; the dividing line is immigration. Will we continue to be the United States, or will we become another failed Latin American state?
On this, it's Donald Trump (and the people) vs. everyone else.
Trump announced his presidential campaign by talking about Mexican rapists. Immigration is the only policy paper he's put out so far -- and he's been crushing the polls. He got his one sustained standing ovation from 20,000 cheering fans in Dallas Monday night when he talked about stopping illegal immigration.
But James B. Stewart gasses on in The New York Times about Trump's "namecalling, personal attacks and one-liners that have vaulted him to the top of the polls." In the entire article, Stewart never mentions immigration.
Perhaps some minority of people will vote for Trump because of his personality. But I notice that it's his position on immigration that gets thousands of people leaping to their feet.
The media will talk about anything but Trump's specific, detailed policies on immigration -- all while claiming he doesn't have any "policy details." The very fact that the entire media -- including most of the conservative commentariat -- obdurately refuse to acknowledge the popularity of Trump's immigration plans is exactly why Trump is exploding in the polls.
Trump isn't trying to imitate anyone. He's leading on the seminal issue of our time while the rest of the field practices looking optimistic in front of the mirror.
The guy who paved the way for Clinton was the liar who boasted: “Read my lips - no new taxes”, and then reneged on that pledge.
Yep. A lot of the other candidates haven’t released their detailed plans yet either. It’s traditionally done in this post-Labor Day phase of the race, so Trump, like the others, is right on schedule—but somehow Trump detractors try to make it look like he’s particularly deficient and delinquent.
(Heck, Biden, Jerry Brown, Mitt Romney, etc., are still making noises about getting in the race—and so they haven’t released any official positions yet.)
I doubt one Trump supporter on this forum can state exactly what Trump has to say about any issue besides immigration.
I’ve read both of his books regarding this, The America We Deserve and Time to Get Tough. He’s pretty clear on all of the issues in them.
Refer to comment #16.
And since they have malicious intentions, we should take a page from Star Wars and call them "Darth Invaders."
“No one’s asking him to be wonkish, but it would help if he showed ANY substance.”
It is interesting what you are saying, but you’re wrong.
I’ve noticed Trump does not think like a politician, or talk like one. A politician telegraphs his “substance” first and foremost and will try to make even insubstantial things substance.
Trump’s substantive things come out almost as asides. He thinks like a business man entrepreneur where it is already a given that substance will be there, because why even talk otherwise.
I live and work in the D.C. area. It gets so exhausting and stressful day in and day out, trying to communicate everyday interactions with a majority population who does not speak English as their first language.
It's one thing for Trump to say he's going to do all of these things. But any time Trump is asked the simple question "how?", he makes perfectly clear that he has absolutely no idea how he plans to do any of these things.
Empty platitudes and slogans are not policies. And they are all Trump has.
+1
Well stated. That analogy works so well because it is actually true. I was trying to come up with a sports analogy, like, the coach doesn’t need to know the science behind football inflation in order to be the best at running a winning football team.
How did all of those magnificent hotels and other structures in his real estate empire get built? Is Trump a construction engineer, laborer, foreman, architect, heavy equipment operator, lawyer, banker, electrician, security guard, bellboy, and so on ?
Well, how does he do it?
Excellent rebuttal to those deeply engaged in “Bulverism.”
“Substance on the issues, FRiend. He’s got none.”
Can you provide a contrast? Who does have substance on an issue and what is it?
“I’m not sold on her in the least, but look at Fiorina’s response to the same Putin question. She gave specific details of things she would do to put Putin in his place.”
Which were?
Haha! Of course the GOP Establishment candidates haven’t provided the details for every single policy proposal they’ve mentioned.
I’ll respond with a question. Have all the GOP Establishment candidates (including Carly) released the level of detail that you require????
It's called "looking for a problem to have."
LOL that’s what I was thinking too, as if these naysayers can point to any other candidate and say, “See? Marco Rubio went over to Syria himself and killed a bunch of ISIS guys! Then he used his skills to find funding to build a bunch of warplanes, which he armed himself loading the munitions, and he personally poured the concrete for several new college facilities in the MidWest, all while he was negotiating with drug companies to supply veterans’ hospitals with medicine...” etc
Apparently, there are still many places in the country where this issue is not a major problem. It is not just the language barrier that is annoying. It is also the entitlement mentality where foreigners living in our country feel strongly that America owes them. This is not to mention basic etiquette in places like public restrooms. Half the public toilets have poo left in them and also pooey hand prints and messes from unsupervised children who don't seem to know how to use the toilet. My wife and I were in a restaurant and the couple in the booth behind us changed one of their toddler's soiled diaper on the table and then left it behind when they left. The staff was aware and didn't say a thing about it.
No he doesn't.
What you are really asking for is for him to give away his "playbook" before you'll let him into the game!
Could you tell what nationality they were?
I have a weekend job full of “diversity” and the employees eat in the break room, then go back to work and leave their piles of trash right on the table where they ate, even while there are waste receptacles nearby for them to dispose of it. Just utter disregard for personal responsibility in keeping a common area free of trash.
It’s so true what you said about the sense of entitlement, too; the rampant foreign swarms overrunning the D.C. area are encouraged to act and speak as if they’re here for the sole purpose of conquest. Did you see that story from the L.A. area, where the Qatar guys with their mansion and exotic sports cars were racing at 100 mph through residential streets, then aggressively threatened a reporter who questioned them, saying “F America” and saying they had diplomatic immunity?
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.