Will Donald Trump be the Jimmy Carter of the GOP?

[philly09]

Not well liked among his own Party

Won an election based on "Trust". 

Didn't exactly win in a landslide. 

Not well liked among the people that voted for him.


So, what do you think?

[AltRightRepublican]

He's the FDR of the GOP.

[Lachi]

He's the FDR of the GOP.

Not surprising seeing this from someone named AltRightRepublican...

[Ljube]

Donald Trump will win re-election in Reagan's style (winning more states than in 2016).

[Person Man]

At this point, I think he will be either like the last three presidents. He will be reelected but by the end, his Party's viability will be called into question. The country will be deTrumpified by the end of the next president's first term the way the country was entirely deBushified by 2012 when the tax cuts were overturned, gays and marijuana were in ascendency, and stem cell research was allowed to be funded.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

He's the FDR of the GOP.

[Person Man]

I think he'll be the LBJ of the GOP.

How so? Sign all kinds of laws and make FP decisions that become the boogey man to 60% of voters for 30 years until his supporters can triangulate against them?

[MasterJedi]

I think he'll be the LBJ of the GOP.

How so? Sign all kinds of laws and make FP decisions that become the boogey man to 60% of voters for 30 years until his supporters can triangulate against them?

Maybe he means he wants to run for re-election but drops out after how unpopular he is?

[mencken]

History does not repeat itself but it does rhyme. Trump's path to victory was eerily similar to Carter's path (outsider running on trust winning a close election against a quasi-incumbent associated with corruption, despite opposition from both party establishments and the candidate himself saying lewd comments in an interview), but I do not think Trump has the micromanagerial mindset of Carter.

[BaldEagle1991]

He's the FDR of the GOP.

That's more like Ronald Reagan.

[Person Man]

History does not repeat itself but it does rhyme. Trump's path to victory was eerily similar to Carter's path (outsider running on trust winning a close election against a quasi-incumbent associated with corruption, despite opposition from both party establishments and the candidate himself saying lewd comments in an interview), but I do not think Trump has the micromanagerial mindset of Carter.

Probably very similar but for different reasons. Carter wanted to do everything himself and Trump will fire you if he is displeased the slightest bit.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

He's the FDR of the GOP.

So he'll be a terrible President then.

[Inmate Trump]

Jimmy was a nice guy who wasn't a secret Russian agent.

So no.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

History does not repeat itself but it does rhyme. Trump's path to victory was eerily similar to Carter's path (outsider running on trust winning a close election against a quasi-incumbent associated with corruption, despite opposition from both party establishments and the candidate himself saying lewd comments in an interview), but I do not think Trump has the micromanagerial mindset of Carter.

ayy lmao at the implication that Carter's 'lewd comments' and Trump's 'lewd comments' are in any substantial way comparable.

[Person Man]

History does not repeat itself but it does rhyme. Trump's path to victory was eerily similar to Carter's path (outsider running on trust winning a close election against a quasi-incumbent associated with corruption, despite opposition from both party establishments and the candidate himself saying lewd comments in an interview), but I do not think Trump has the micromanagerial mindset of Carter.

ayy lmao at the implication that Carter's 'lewd comments' and Trump's 'lewd comments' are in any substantial way comparable.

Yeah. They were basically the opposite thing.

[Illiniwek]

Hmm this checks out with the pattern.

FDR-->Reagan
Truman-->Bush
Eisenhower-->Clinton
Kennedy/LBJ-->Bush
Nixon/Ford-->Obama
Carter-->trump

[Virginiá]

lol Ronald Reagan and FDR. Yes, let's act like Trump is normal and that bigotry, bullying, sexism, sexual assault and incessant lying is the new norm. He ran against a bad candidate drowning in scandals. If he was bringing about some new era, he wouldn't have lost the popular vote and roughly half of his supporters wouldn't be basing their votes against Clinton and not for him.

FDR and Reagan changed a generation and more importantly, they locked in the support of the youth in their presidencies, people who grow up and perpetuate that brand of politics/policy. Trump got 37% of the 18-29 vote, same as Romney. He lost the 18-44 vote by double digits. He was resoundingly rejected by the future of America and forced on us by the past.

In the end, Trump will likely be the last gasp of a shrinking population of old white people scared by sweeping cultural changes in our society, the evolution of the economy and the browning of America

[Person Man]

Hmm this checks out with the pattern.

FDR-->Reagan
Truman-->Bush
Eisenhower-->Clinton
Kennedy/LBJ-->Bush
Nixon/Ford-->Obama
Carter-->trump

That's not how it works. What I will say is this- We will have a Party system like we had in the 1850s in 5 years unless Democrats can start winning again. However, Democrats have been able to pull through before and at least upballot, they aren't in the worst of shape.

[Xing]

He seems more like a much nastier and more bigoted version of Dubya. I hope that doesn't mean he wins re-election, but it could if Democrats run a flawed candidate similar to Kerry in 2020.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

FDR and Reagan changed a generation and more importantly, they locked in the support of the youth in their presidencies, people who grow up and perpetuate that brand of politics/policy. Trump got 37% of the 18-29 vote, same as Romney. He lost the 18-44 vote by double digits. He was resoundingly rejected by the future of America and forced on us by the past.

Probably, because USA was 90% white? Among Whites Trump was doing ~about the same, if not better Reagan.

Among Whites:
18-29     T+5
30-44     T+18
45-64     T+29
65+        T+19

But it is pretty much irrelevant anyway. If he'll turn out to be a good president, he'll win all this group by decent double digits. If not, than yeah...

[Mr. Smith]

Precisely.

And don't gimme "oooh Jimmy was a nice guy", Hunter Thompson himself admitted the peanut farmer had a mean streak.

You can't seriously chalk up "NeverTrump" and "ABC", both performing the worst in The West and best in The South, both getting just under 50% of the primary vote, both taking the un-flippable Wisconsin into their column [if we continue the parallels, LBJ picked the lock and Dubya was damn close to it], both took on Establishment politicians with too much baggage and eked out.

Both took establishment tools as Veep to pacify the base.

The GE was one that only "got interesting" towards the end when both of them hit a sex-related scandal [Yeah Carter's was technically nothing, but the 70's was clearly a more prudish time]

Now look at the maps, Carter and Trump won practically all the same states [Only 7 consistently D states] while Clinton's states were pretty much all Ford...only the F*&^UDEMOCRAT Plains States are the same.

On the other side, Bernie and Reagan took the exact same primary percentage from the Establishment favorite and the IceSpear's of '76 whined about "destroying the party".



How the hell can chalk any of these things up to coincidence, when there's a far clearer explanation?

[Virginiá]

FDR and Reagan changed a generation and more importantly, they locked in the support of the youth in their presidencies, people who grow up and perpetuate that brand of politics/policy. Trump got 37% of the 18-29 vote, same as Romney. He lost the 18-44 vote by double digits. He was resoundingly rejected by the future of America and forced on us by the past.

Probably, because USA was 90% white? Among Whites Trump was doing ~about the same, if not better Reagan.

Among Whites:
18-29     T+5
30-44     T+18
45-64     T+29
65+        T+19

But it is pretty much irrelevant anyway. If he'll turn out to be a good president, he'll win all this group by decent double digits. If not, than yeah...

And Obama lost white Millennials in 2012 last I recall as well. Regions are not at all uniform. White youth in some states drag that number down quite a bit. You'll also notice that despite winning white youth, he still lost the 18-29 group overall 55% - 37%, with none of Hillary's decreased margin from 2012 going to Trump.

But, also, pointing out that it was whites Reagan won really is irrelevant. The next generations of young people now are heavily diverse. It's not enough to just win over white young voters (unless maybe you win them by 20-30 points or something?). Also not sure what Reagan white young voter margins you are talking about - 1980 vs 1984 is a substantial difference. Trump's would only apply to 1980, which the 18-29 overall vote was almost tied, in which case T+5 among white 18-29 might make for a ok comparison.

And so again my point is that if Trump were truly the next FDR/Reagan [insert loud cackles here], then he wouldn't have been repudiated by a very large majority of America's future generation(s). Trump is basically just a loud f**k you from America's elders, which is great and all, but represents little more than that in terms of long-term generational legacies.

[Nym90]

Another similarity is that both won their party nominations with only a little more than 40 percent of the primary vote, only winning because opposition to them never united behind one alternative.

[Sumner 1868]

It's a hard to compare a moralizing figure whose supporters liked his morality with a toxic figure whose supporters liked his toxicity. And there is no inflation/stagflation crisis or anything similar to it.

Besides, there is no Democratic version of Reagan, who didn't exactly help his party much long-term in any case.

[Vega]

It's a hard to compare a moralizing figure whose supporters liked his morality with a toxic figure whose supporters liked his toxicity. And there is no inflation/stagflation crisis or anything similar to it.

Besides, there is no Democratic version of Reagan, who didn't exactly help his party much long-term in any case.

Really? I know there isn't an exact carbon copy, but in terms of status, Sanders is fairly similar.