Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 28, 2020, 05:08:18 am
News: 2020 Gubernatorial Predictions are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderators: Torie, Senator ON Progressive)
  Most consequential presidential election? (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Most consequential presidential election?  (Read 7096 times)
RoboWop
AMB1996
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,739
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

« on: October 03, 2018, 01:41:47 pm »

Here's a wild card: 1976.

Ford wins and all the woes of the late 1970's get pinned on the GOP. Watergate, vietnam, "malaise," Iranian hostage crisis, all perceived as a 12-year Republican orgy of incompetence and corruption. There is never a Reagan Revolution (with all that entails) in this timeline! Ted Kennedy (or someone very much like him) wins a landslide in 1980, opening the door for a second Great Society with Democratic super-majorities in Congress.

For all we know if Dewey had won in 1948, it would have prevented the Republican resurgence with Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

At least one historian has suggested that a Dewey victory would have prevented the resurgence of the southern strategy; stopped the GOP from adopting its intense Red-baiting campaign; and led to a much more liberal Republican Party in the long term. It's interesting to imagine a United States divided, today, between an anti-elitist, know-nothing "populist" Democratic Party anchored in the South (but with support from working-class whites nationwide)... and a business-oriented "progressive" Republican Party drawing support from educated whites and minorities across the country! Basically an extension of the 19th century's voting patterns.

Imagine a 2012 Democratic platform calling for single-payer healthcare and constitutional amendments banning abortion and same-se marriage.

That's idiotic and anyone with a basic knowledge of world politics 101 and ideology 101  would know that would never ouccr.

I guess a "basic knowledge of world politics" requires you to ignore everything outside the anglosphere or before 2000.
Logged
RoboWop
AMB1996
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,739
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2018, 08:49:11 pm »
« Edited: October 03, 2018, 08:55:41 pm by AMB1996 »

Here's a wild card: 1976.

Ford wins and all the woes of the late 1970's get pinned on the GOP. Watergate, vietnam, "malaise," Iranian hostage crisis, all perceived as a 12-year Republican orgy of incompetence and corruption. There is never a Reagan Revolution (with all that entails) in this timeline! Ted Kennedy (or someone very much like him) wins a landslide in 1980, opening the door for a second Great Society with Democratic super-majorities in Congress.

For all we know if Dewey had won in 1948, it would have prevented the Republican resurgence with Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

At least one historian has suggested that a Dewey victory would have prevented the resurgence of the southern strategy; stopped the GOP from adopting its intense Red-baiting campaign; and led to a much more liberal Republican Party in the long term. It's interesting to imagine a United States divided, today, between an anti-elitist, know-nothing "populist" Democratic Party anchored in the South (but with support from working-class whites nationwide)... and a business-oriented "progressive" Republican Party drawing support from educated whites and minorities across the country! Basically an extension of the 19th century's voting patterns.

Imagine a 2012 Democratic platform calling for single-payer healthcare and constitutional amendments banning abortion and same-se marriage.

That's idiotic and anyone with a basic knowledge of world politics 101 and ideology 101  would know that would never ouccr.

I guess a "basic knowledge of world politics" requires you to ignore everything outside the anglosphere or before 2000.

Please tell me which country had a left-wing party that was less socially left-wing than the right-wing party???

Look to countries with a strong religious presence, which are typically outside the Anglosphere today.

It's somewhat common in countries with high Catholic populations. Juntos Haremos Historia, for example, is a coalition based on "left-wing" economics with "right-wing" social theory. Marina Silva, a socialist who briefly was the leading left candidate for president of Brazil, has expressed conservative Christian principles in the past. Christian social democracy is a very real thing and you should read up on it start with integralism.

Some Islamic parties also debatably lean left on economic theory while being strongly authoritarian on social matters. The Muslim Brotherhood is anti-communist but also bases its agenda on Islam including zakat al-mal, meaning that while it might not be a strictly statist redistributive party, it clearly defines economic redistribution as part of its political aim.

On the other side of that coin we have BJP not strictly redistributive but populist and interventionist, with an extreme hard-line right view of social issues and hierarchy. However, its economic views are nationalist and illiberal rather than redistributive. It might qualify for hard liberals but not most.

So there not only do these situations exist, these are currently active parties. Going back further in history to a more religious period, I'd guess you'd find even more examples. So it does "ouccr" no matter how idiotic you think it is.
Logged
RoboWop
AMB1996
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,739
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2018, 10:30:53 am »
« Edited: October 04, 2018, 10:33:56 am by AMB1996 »

Nobody said anything about a defined left or right, which is an impossibly subjective standard. You claimed it was impossible for a strong coalition to hold economically redistributive beliefs and socially traditional ones. (explicitly, you said it would be impossible for Democrats to support single-payer but oppose abortion.) There was neither a claim that the party must be aligned as a binary left-right grouping or that the party must be relatively more conservative or liberal or leftist than its opposition.

Your claim is obviously untrue to anyone with "a basic knowledge of world politics 101 and ideology 101". Thanks for playing.

(And for OSR, yes, I said don't buy BJP as an option, but I included it as a contrast to MB. Don't really know why. Guess I was on a comparative roll.)
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC