Trump’s win vs. Reagan’s blowout: Why 2016 is NOT 1980 (Endorsed by Mark Levin)

Conservative Review ^ | November 18, 2016 | Paul Kengor

[conservative98]

Beginning last summer, I wrote a series of articles for Conservative Review comparing Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan. The series was inspired by Trump enthusiasts insisting that their man was the closest thing to America’s next Ronald Reagan. Donald Trump was no less than “another Reagan.” Most central to the Trump-Reagan thesis was the curious insistence that the underestimated Trump, just like the once-underestimated Reagan, would rise up and crush Hillary Clinton in Reaganesque fashion. It would be a landslide.

Don't Miss A Tweet Profile Picture Conservative Review @CR Follow Well, with the historic vote of Tuesday, November 8, 2016, and Trump nabbing the presidency from the grasp of Hillary Clinton, I’ve received many emails from Trump enthusiasts claiming vindication. One emailer told me that Donald Trump will be chiseled on Mt. Rushmore one day, the end-game of his Reaganesque march and crowning “landslide” victory. Yes, the emailer used precisely that word, and repeatedly demanded that I concede the “landslide.”

It’s like 1980 all over again.

Before addressing how wildly inaccurate such claims are, I want to pause to congratulate Donald Trump, his team, and his devoted followers. I also want to tell them that they’re damned lucky, and in their heart of hearts, they should know it. Trump could have very, very easily lost, and really probably should have, as I’ll show in a minute by reviewing some of the shocking data.

[GraceG]

it would be like 1980 if not for the massive voter fraud and illegal alien poll turnout in 2016 by the DNC...

It took a landslide in 2016 to squeak by a victory.....

in 1980, an actual Republican Landslide = Landslide

in 2016, an actual Republican Landslide = a squeaker

[ari-freedom]

hmm did he say this about W Bush, who barely won the electoral vote and didn’t win PA, Michigan and Wisconsin? Reagan didn’t win a GOP majority in the House and I don’t think they had a majority of governors or state legislatures, either

[Still Thinking]

Did Reagan suffer the systemic MSM assault?

Sure, they thought he was a lazy dunce. They might have been a little less intense whether because they were slightly less biased or more afraid to out themselves, but they definitely bagged on him nonstop.

[Tanniker Smith]

If he gets the economy going, brings back real jobs, and oversees real growth, he’ll be remembered like Reagan, as much as the libs might hate it

[Hieronymus]

He has both houses of Congress at least nominally on his side.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Trump and Reagan did have that in common.
Tremendous amounts of energy for seventy year old guys.

[chris37]

I wonder who is more irrelevant these days, Glenn Beck or Mark Levin?

[ari-freedom]

Reagan was cough cough pretty soft on illegals. Which is why it is blue for the foreseeable future

[samtheman]

Legal Votes for Hillary
minus
Illegal Votes for Hillary

is Less Than

Legal Votes for Trump

[Buckeye McFrog]

Oh, yeah! The MSM freak-out over Reagan was every bit as bad as this one.

[trebb]

All Trump needs to do is follow his agenda - the rest will take care of itself and his reelection will be huge....Levin and other “conservative” pundits are the ones that got some ‘splainin’ to do.....

[samtheman]

Correction:

Total Votes for Hillary
minus
Illegal Votes for Hillary

Is Less Than

Legal Votes for Trump

[arthurus]

Trump is, indeed, the closest thing to Reagan there is on the scene but he is NOT a Reagan. We need a harder drivng CEO than Reagan because the Machine is so much more extensive and powerful. I hope Trump is of a mind to dismantle the Machine, something Reagan tried to do but could not though he did trim it back a bit. I think he can do it if he will. It does require some un-Reagan tactics, though. Trimming the Machine is not at all sufficient now. Trimming will get us a few years of relief and something like prosperity but the Machine will regenerate ad a much faster pace than it did post Reagan. Reagan gave us a quarter century of prosperity. Trump can't get more than a coule of years post Trump unless he actually abolishes much of the bureaucracy. He can't do that by "working with" Congress, even a Republican Congress.

[ari-freedom]

hmm I don’t think Hannity was *that* hard on Trump ;)

[Behind the Blue Wall]

It’s unreal to me how utterly and completely wrong these people have been, yet still persist in it. But 2020 will partly be decided by how well Trump and the GOPers in Congress fulfill their promises, but also (although not unrelated) how well they are able to rid the country of illegal aliens in four years time.

[Still Thinking]

You misspelled yuuuuge.

[broken_arrow1]

Reagan made the mistake of picking GHW Bush as his VP. Thousand points of light, tax increases, New World Order and too many Bushes later...here we are.

Mike Pence is NOT GHW Bush! Thank God.

[broken_arrow1]

GHW Bush also said he would vote for HILLARY! Turncoat POS.

[Morpheus2009]

Well, something will need to be done, because the initial Trump scare is going to wear off.

[phoneman08]

In some ways Trump’s win is even MORE impressive. The Democrats have been packing the electorate with millions of third-world voters and indoctrinated young people since 1980. Millions of sane voters have gone to the great polling place in the sky.

So true. If we take a closer look, unlike 1980 California is now royal blue. And the pace of demographic change has overtaken other such natural red states such as Virginia, Nevada, and Colorado. And soon Georgia, N Carolina, Arizona, and even Texas. The ability to radically shake up the electoral map is something only Trump could have pulled off.