12-27-2019, 04:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-27-2019, 04:23 PM by Eric the Green.)
(12-27-2019, 10:53 AM)ResidentArtist Wrote: I thought that "accomplisher" wasn't quite an accurate label, but that was just how I remembered it being written. Something like "The Crusader" might be more applicable, since both Bush and Kennedy/Johnson represented the young generation that elected the realigner before governing on those principles in midlife. Both were regarded as mostly failures by history in large part by the unraveling party system, although JFK was spared from this fate. Had he lived it's probable his public image would have eventually deteriorated anyway because of his place in the cycle, possibly seen as too soft on Vietnam.
As for a landslide win, the 2024 election is the one to watch even if a Democrat wins in 2020. It's easy to forget now that 1980 polling was close before Mondale lost in an even greater blowout four years later. I wouldn't doubt we could be headed for a progressive decade in the 2020s since the pattern implies this kind of change.
Good analysis. The Crusader might be a good label. One correction though, if you think the young generation elected Reagan or even Bush. Stats showed that the boomers, especially core Boomers rather than Jonesers, were less likely to vote for Reagan than other generations. No generation elects a president; that's the work of 3 or 4 of them.
I doubt JFK would have ever been seen as a failure. He was able to make the best of things with his charm and charisma, and his cautious adroitness in policy, which the oafish, stubborn and ponderous LBJ could never do. But it's academic; JFK was destined to die in office just when he did by any measure of the cosmic fates.