Donald Trump 2016 = Richard Nixon 1968?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:05:10 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Donald Trump 2016 = Richard Nixon 1968?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Is Donald Trump in 2016 similar to Richard Nixon running in 1968?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 38

Author Topic: Donald Trump 2016 = Richard Nixon 1968?  (Read 1459 times)
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 11, 2016, 11:37:58 PM »

Is the recent protests and riots in Chicago at the Trump rally similar to the the events that occured for Richard Nixon running in 1968?
Logged
Santander
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,850
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: 4.00, S: 2.61


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 11, 2016, 11:39:52 PM »

Yes, this has become a textbook Law and Order campaign.
Logged
Yank2133
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,387


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2016, 11:45:31 PM »

No.

Nixon wasn't the catalyst for the late 60 uprising like Trump is in 2016. If anything Trump and the GOP are the Democrats in 1968.
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 12, 2016, 12:36:50 AM »

Breitbart has to disagree with you guys.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/11/ghost-of-1968-resurrected-in-chicago/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
Logged
Boston Bread
New Canadaland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,636
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.00, S: -5.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2016, 12:38:35 AM »

No.

Nixon campaigned on calming things down. Trump wants to stir things up. Law and order can never be high energy.
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2016, 12:39:29 AM »

No.

Nixon campaigned on calming things down. Trump wants to stir things up. Law and order can never be high energy.
So what if history says so and repeats itself, and Trump wins a landslide against Hillary?
Logged
Boston Bread
New Canadaland
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,636
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.00, S: -5.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2016, 12:41:28 AM »

No.

Nixon campaigned on calming things down. Trump wants to stir things up. Law and order can never be high energy.
So what if history says so and repeats itself, and Trump wins a landslide against Hillary?
You think 1968 was a landslide?

If Trump wins, well at least it isn't Cruz lol. I can at least hope a Trump win will result in the end "small government" conservatism.
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 12, 2016, 12:46:10 AM »

Nah, I'm beginning to think Hillary fulfills the role of Nixon more than anyone else - lost eight years ago, makes a comeback by being the voice of reason in an era of yelling, screaming. Trump is claiming the mantle of the "silent majority" but really Trump's crew is the one screaming and shouting. Clinton could provide that "silent majority" address easily (though obviously updated for the liberalism of the Democratic Party and the times we live in).

Trump obviously fulfills the role of Wallace. The question is - who is Humphrey? I guess Romney, as an elder party figure who gets no respect this time around.
Logged
bagelman
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,602
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -4.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 12, 2016, 12:51:34 AM »

Is the recent protests and riots in Chicago at the Trump rally similar to the the events that occured for Richard Nixon running in 1968?

Wasn't that protest, being at the DNC, directly at Johnson and his interventionist wing of the party that started the war? Or am I getting my history wrong?

Anyway, Nixon was a FP president and Trump priorities are more economic policy. Law and Order may become a bigger issue in light of Chicago and we'll see how Trump and the other candidates react but for now Nixon = Trump isn't the best comparison. Trump = Wallace isn't a perfect comparison but is the best parallel when contrasting with 1968. Hillary may be compared to Humphrey (Democratic too right-wing for the ideological base of younger voters) and Nixon (sketchy but experienced moderate who may not be the nicest person in private).
Logged
Virginiá
Virginia
Administratrix
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,856
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.97, S: -5.91

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 12, 2016, 12:51:54 AM »
« Edited: March 12, 2016, 01:00:46 AM by Virginia »

No.

Nixon campaigned on calming things down. Trump wants to stir things up. Law and order can never be high energy.
So what if history says so and repeats itself, and Trump wins a landslide against Hillary?
You think 1968 was a landslide?

If Trump wins, well at least it isn't Cruz lol. I can at least hope a Trump win will result in the end "small government" conservatism.

He was probably thinking of Nixon's monster 1972 landslide. His 1968 win was super close in the PV (43.4% - 42.7%, with Wallace's 13.5%)

You could argue that Wallace threw the election to Nixon by dragging quite a lot of votes away from Humphrey. For instance, in California, it was 47.82% - 44.74% Nixon, New YorkSad 47.08% - 44.15 Nixon, so it wouldn't have taken many Wallace votes to tip that to Democrats. I say all this because Nixon probably wouldn't have won that if it weren't for a 3rd party, and this time, if there is one, it'll be Republicans splitting their own votes and not the other way around.

Either way, I don't think it will be a good comparison if we're going by the winning margin. Hillary is probably going to decimate Trump, instead of a near PV tie. Trump, to a very limited degree, is closer to Wallace.
Logged
5280
MagneticFree
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,404
United States


Political Matrix
E: 6.97, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 12, 2016, 12:55:20 AM »

Nah, I'm beginning to think Hillary fulfills the role of Nixon more than anyone else - lost eight years ago, makes a comeback by being the voice of reason in an era of yelling, screaming. Trump is claiming the mantle of the "silent majority" but really Trump's crew is the one screaming and shouting. Clinton could provide that "silent majority" address easily (though obviously updated for the liberalism of the Democratic Party and the times we live in).

Trump obviously fulfills the role of Wallace. The question is - who is Humphrey? I guess Romney, as an elder party figure who gets no respect this time around.

By that opinion, the GOP wins in 2024 after 8 years of Clinton, the GOP president gets defeated in a Carter style election in 2028 after 4 years by another Democratic Reagan? Then by 2036, a Democratic Bush gets elected by riding off the coattails of the Democratic Reagan, then gets defeated in 2040 by a Republican Clinton?

2016 - 2024 = Clinton/Nixon
2024 - 2028 = Republican Carter
2028 - 2036 = Democratic Reagan
2036 - 2040 = Democratic Bush
2040 - 2048 = Republican Clinton
Logged
bagelman
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,602
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -4.17

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 12, 2016, 01:12:08 AM »

Nah, I'm beginning to think Hillary fulfills the role of Nixon more than anyone else - lost eight years ago, makes a comeback by being the voice of reason in an era of yelling, screaming. Trump is claiming the mantle of the "silent majority" but really Trump's crew is the one screaming and shouting. Clinton could provide that "silent majority" address easily (though obviously updated for the liberalism of the Democratic Party and the times we live in).

Trump obviously fulfills the role of Wallace. The question is - who is Humphrey? I guess Romney, as an elder party figure who gets no respect this time around.

By that opinion, the GOP wins in 2024 after 8 years of Clinton, the GOP president gets defeated in a Carter style election in 2028 after 4 years by another Democratic Reagan? Then by 2036, a Democratic Bush gets elected by riding off the coattails of the Democratic Reagan, then gets defeated in 2040 by a Republican Clinton?

2016 - 2024 = Clinton/Nixon
2024 - 2028 = Republican Carter
2028 - 2036 = Democratic Reagan
2036 - 2040 = Democratic Bush
2040 - 2048 = Republican Clinton

Clinton would be out of office by 2022 after a gross and clearly illegal abuse of power.
Logged
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,536
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 12, 2016, 01:14:19 AM »

Nah, I'm beginning to think Hillary fulfills the role of Nixon more than anyone else - lost eight years ago, makes a comeback by being the voice of reason in an era of yelling, screaming. Trump is claiming the mantle of the "silent majority" but really Trump's crew is the one screaming and shouting. Clinton could provide that "silent majority" address easily (though obviously updated for the liberalism of the Democratic Party and the times we live in).

Trump obviously fulfills the role of Wallace. The question is - who is Humphrey? I guess Romney, as an elder party figure who gets no respect this time around.
I think that we are seeing what would have happened if Dems would have nominated Wallace instead of Humphrey.
Logged
Ljube
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,991
Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: March 12, 2016, 02:25:14 AM »

Nah, I'm beginning to think Hillary fulfills the role of Nixon more than anyone else - lost eight years ago, makes a comeback by being the voice of reason in an era of yelling, screaming.

Which would include impeachment?
Logged
Ljube
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,991
Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: March 12, 2016, 02:30:40 AM »

No.

Nixon wasn't the catalyst for the late 60 uprising like Trump is in 2016. If anything Trump and the GOP are the Democrats in 1968.

TRUMP hasn't been the catalyst for this year's uprising either. These terrible groups, BLM and others existed before TRUMP. His message is one of inclusion, unity and love.

I think he can reshape himself as a Law and Order candidate for the general election campaign.
Logged
m4567
Rookie
**
Posts: 220
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: March 12, 2016, 06:00:41 AM »

Hillary is Nixon

Trump is Wallace

Kasich is Humphrey
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: March 12, 2016, 06:35:56 AM »

No, TRUMP's language is far less offensive.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,502
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: March 12, 2016, 09:08:19 AM »

Nah, I'm beginning to think Hillary fulfills the role of Nixon more than anyone else - lost eight years ago, makes a comeback by being the voice of reason in an era of yelling, screaming. Trump is claiming the mantle of the "silent majority" but really Trump's crew is the one screaming and shouting. Clinton could provide that "silent majority" address easily (though obviously updated for the liberalism of the Democratic Party and the times we live in).

Trump obviously fulfills the role of Wallace. The question is - who is Humphrey? I guess Romney, as an elder party figure who gets no respect this time around.

Trump is somewhat analogous to Wallace not because he is running a racist campaign (he's not).  He's Wallace because he's reaching a large group of voters who consider themselves, their concerns, and their positions on issues to be poorly represented by both parties, including the party they have been supporting.  Trump's campaign has exposed a real disconnect between the GOP and its orthodox stances and what a huge bloc of GOP voters really believe and really want from a Republican. 

Trump is anti-immigration and extremely concerned about Muslims entering our country for the purpose of jihadism.  Are these REALLY racist positions?  Are there not legitimate National Security concerns about poorly vetted Middle East Islamic immigrants?  Do violent trans-national gangs (MS-13, Los Zetas) not exploit our porous Southern border to enter the US and do their violent "business" in American cities and towns? 

I would like to know, by the way, where the liberal outrage is for BLM just using intimidation and coercion for taking Bernie Sanders' mike at one of his rallies.  Perhaps one of the concerns people have is Sanders's "Thank you, sir; may I have another?" response to that event.  These folks who are interrupting rallies are not "demonstrators"; they are practitioners of RAW COERCION, no different than collectors for a loan shark.  Where are the courageous liberals calling out bad behavior on the left?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.054 seconds with 15 queries.