Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Well, I'm back
#74
(02-11-2018, 05:18 PM)Mikebert Wrote:
(02-09-2018, 08:08 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Buchanan was with the southerners, who wanted to preserve slavery.  Hoover did not see the government as having a role to play in regulating the economy.  I count both as clinging to older sets of values, in not seeing anything wrong in letting dire problems continue to exist, in not perceiving a need for basic transformation.  In that, they were similar to today's abusers of women or climate change deniers.  Some conservatives cling to older privileges.  Some conservatives do not act to solve problems.

And of course, there is the division of wealth and power.  What is theirs they want to keep.  The progressives, too, will have a similar motive.  For some, the moral motives are just a side ploy that attracts people to join their cause. Others truly care.

Along your line of values lock.  Are you familiar with Stephen Skowronek's political time model? He holds that there have been several reconstructive presidents (Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, FDR, Reagan) who have set a new dominant political ideology. We are currently living under the Reagan dispensation. Until this dispensation passes, obvious policies like a $3 trillion stimulus passed by a 60 seat Democratic majority in 2009 do not get done. Had Democrats done this then Obama would be reconstructive. 

But they didn't so Obama ended up as pre-emptive, Skowronek's name for presidents (e.g. Clinton, Nixon, Eisenhower) from the opposition party to the governing dispensation who try to "preempt" the discourse, redirecting the interpretation of the reigning dispensation in terms more favorable to their party.  Thing Clinton's declaration that "the era of big government is over" with his expansion of CHIP and increase in the Earned Income credit, and think of Eisenhower's decision to not challenge the New Deal, but instead to create a Republican-controlled "military-industrial complex" to offset the Democratic-controlled "social welfare state".

Presidents from the same party as the reconstructive president (e.g. Bush I& II for Reagan, and Truman, Kennedy and Johnson for FDR) are called articulative presidents.  These are the largest category and are not of interest here.

Most interesting are the disjunctive presidents.  These come for the same party as the reconstructive party, at a time when their dispensation in under attack. They have the unhappy job of dealing with the consequences of the failure of their party's ideology to deal with the problems of the time. Examples include JQ Adams, Pierce & Buchanan, Hoover and Carter. Note these guys were president just before or during a social moment.

Right now Trump is third Republican interlude since the Reagan dispensation began.  This makes him like Carter for FDR,  Harding for Lincoln, Buchanan for Jackson, and JQ Adams for Jefferson. Three of these are disjunctive, but Harding is not. The Harding connection is interesting because Trump most closely resembles the current time by other cycle measures I use.

So my prediction, based on historical analogy is 75% probably Trump ends up as disjunctive (and so is not reelected) and 25% probability he ends up as articulative and so wins reelection.

We are approaching the time of a social moment, and  it is unlikely that President Trump will fit that moment. Unlike Reagan he is unable to convince the other side to yield anything. Even worse, he disappoints many who supported him initially with their votes.

We have yet to have any debacles of foreign policy, and so far the economy is humming along -- but current polls suggest that he is wildly unpopular. So just imagine what happens if the economy goes in the tank. Articulative? If you mean 'articulate' -- he most certainly isn't. He is a 'My Way or the Highway' leader, someone that one can back only if the organization behind one lavishes its employees or clients with income or business opportunities. I prefer organizations that need not throw money at supporters to satisfy them.

I could of course repeat my assessment of his faults as a leader, but by now that would be boring. The question is whether he can change his ways.  I see him too rigid to change his ways if things require a change in approach. Shoddy ethics are difficult to reform.

He certainly is not a Great Restorer even if he called people to "Make America Great Again". When was America better without qualification? Maybe life was easier in certain respects at times or that opportunities that seem  obvious now (like settling on the western frontier or getting in on the ground floor of 1970s high technology) seem to be missing. Never mind that much  of the West was a harsh and unforgiving land, and that many "tech" start-ups went belly-up quickly or required personalities that many lacked.

Now here is a kicker: there might not be a Great Restorer forty years or so after the  last  one (in our case, Reagan's 'Morning in America' is now almost forty years ago). Maybe we have a social moment and a President ill-suited to it. Cleveland? B. Harrison? McKinley? Theodore Roosevelt may be by far the best President between Lincoln and FDR, and (1) he was an accident of a tragedy (the assassination of McKinley), and (2) his reforms were intended to forestall any revolutionary change.

Can we have a social moment with a President who bungles the moment politically? That would be a disjunctive President in the extreme. At the worst we could have a President in office at the time of the imposition of a rotten new social order who rides that perverse tide. For some, a combination  of cheap labor, brutal management, monopolistic business, and a legal system that punishes anyone who opposes such would be wish fulfillment for the profiteers of such an order and a nightmare for everyone else. Our economic elites often see their  own gain and indulgence as the definitive Good and that anyone who dissents with such as criminal. That would be an America with Gulags.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist  but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.


Reply


Messages In This Thread
Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 1954 - 01-04-2018, 11:10 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by gabrielle - 01-05-2018, 10:40 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 1954 - 01-05-2018, 11:40 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Kinser79 - 01-06-2018, 10:08 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Galen - 01-07-2018, 01:22 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Kinser79 - 01-07-2018, 12:30 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-09-2018, 11:11 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 01-09-2018, 07:59 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Galen - 01-10-2018, 05:12 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 01-10-2018, 12:53 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 1954 - 01-08-2018, 08:19 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Kinser79 - 01-09-2018, 01:42 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Galen - 01-09-2018, 05:46 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 1954 - 01-09-2018, 06:14 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-09-2018, 11:16 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Kinser79 - 01-09-2018, 09:01 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-10-2018, 01:24 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Kinser79 - 01-09-2018, 09:30 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-09-2018, 11:25 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 1954 - 01-09-2018, 10:19 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Kinser79 - 01-09-2018, 09:31 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-10-2018, 02:33 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Kinser79 - 01-09-2018, 10:29 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Kinser79 - 01-11-2018, 03:22 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 01-11-2018, 05:52 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-12-2018, 08:06 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 01-14-2018, 07:15 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-14-2018, 02:55 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 01-15-2018, 01:12 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-15-2018, 05:37 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 01-16-2018, 06:40 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-18-2018, 03:26 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 01-21-2018, 08:27 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-22-2018, 12:23 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by tg63 - 01-12-2018, 12:36 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 01-14-2018, 11:34 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 01-14-2018, 12:44 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 01-15-2018, 03:26 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-15-2018, 05:44 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 01-15-2018, 08:10 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 1954 - 01-15-2018, 10:16 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 1954 - 01-15-2018, 11:14 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 01-15-2018, 10:47 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Classic-Xer - 01-17-2018, 06:35 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 01-17-2018, 10:43 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 01-16-2018, 12:21 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 01-18-2018, 03:32 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-18-2018, 03:38 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 1954 - 01-18-2018, 04:02 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 01-22-2018, 11:05 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-23-2018, 11:51 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 01-23-2018, 01:12 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 01-23-2018, 05:15 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 01-23-2018, 05:13 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-25-2018, 10:08 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 01-24-2018, 08:18 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 01-25-2018, 01:33 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Ragnarök_62 - 01-25-2018, 08:00 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 01-25-2018, 11:50 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 01-25-2018, 01:22 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-25-2018, 04:05 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 01-25-2018, 04:47 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 01-25-2018, 08:38 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by David Horn - 01-26-2018, 01:40 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 01-28-2018, 08:07 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 02-02-2018, 04:30 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 02-02-2018, 05:08 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 02-03-2018, 06:17 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 02-03-2018, 06:25 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 02-09-2018, 03:45 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 02-09-2018, 05:00 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 02-09-2018, 08:08 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 02-11-2018, 05:18 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by pbrower2a - 02-11-2018, 09:21 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 02-11-2018, 11:49 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 03-13-2018, 06:46 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Tim Randal Walker - 03-15-2018, 06:55 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Tim Randal Walker - 03-15-2018, 07:02 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 03-15-2018, 07:40 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 03-25-2018, 05:57 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Bob Butler 54 - 03-28-2018, 12:14 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Eric the Green - 02-07-2019, 01:50 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Ragnarök_62 - 02-07-2019, 03:17 PM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Mikebert - 04-06-2018, 11:06 AM
RE: Well, I'm back - by Marypoza - 02-07-2019, 02:55 AM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Coming back Teejay 2 2,897 09-02-2018, 08:07 PM
Last Post: Teejay

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)