Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Carter and Reagan were both non-establishment Presidents.
How do you figure that? Both were governors, that seems to be pretty establishment to me. Using that argument Clinton and Bush 43 weren't establishment candidates either. Frankly, god forbid, if Trump is elected as the Republican nominee that establishes his "establishment" cred as any other president. Now Gary Johnson, that would be a non-establishment President.
Either way, I need a better definition of establishment than has been offered so far.
How do you figure that? Both were governors, that seems to be pretty establishment to me. Using that argument Clinton and Bush 43 weren't establishment candidates either. Frankly, god forbid, if Trump is elected as the Republican nominee that establishes his "establishment" cred as any other president. Now Gary Johnson, that would be a non-establishment President.
Either way, I need a better definition of establishment than has been offered so far.
No kidding. Because JFK is not the first name that leaps to my mind when I think of non-establishment candidates.
How do you figure that? Both were governors, that seems to be pretty establishment to me. Using that argument Clinton and Bush 43 weren't establishment candidates either. Frankly, god forbid, if Trump is elected as the Republican nominee that establishes his "establishment" cred as any other president. Now Gary Johnson, that would be a non-establishment President.
My logic is hardly that they were outsiders because they were governors. They were outsiders because they weren't part of the party establishment and because they were actively opposed by their party establishments.
Carter was a conservative Democratic governor trying to straddle the fence at a time when Nixon's Southern Strategy had been most of a decade in the making. He was actively opposed by the liberal party establishment. After all, this is a party that between 1968 and 1988 nominated four flaming liberals in the form of Humphrey, McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis... and Carter - the complete outlier in the bunch. Remember ABC? The Anybody But Carter bunch were pretty much a who's-who of Democratic Party insiders. Frank Church. Mo Udall. Jerry Brown. Humphrey (who flirted with another running at the convention, but ultimately declined). Indeed, Carter's campaign was largely based on the fact that he was a complete outsider tapping into the post-Watergate desire to have someone not of Washington in the White House. And it showed in his Presidency. No other President in my lifetime has had such poor relations with the Congressional establishment of his own party.
As for Reagan, it was the Reagan Revolution that remade the party. He'd been on Goldwater's side in 1964, an election that saw numerous Republican officeholders break with their nominee. He'd run in 1969 and finished second to the establishment Nixon. He'd run against Ford in 1976. And finally, in 1980, his run against the very definition of the establishment, GHW Bush, finally remade the Republican Party into a conservative party, not merely a party of both liberals and conservatives on the side of business. Reagan's 16-year struggle from 1964 to 1980 was as an outsider being blocked time and time again by the establishment until he defeated it and made Reaganism - and what had once been apostases, such as his supply-side nonsense and the alignment of the Moral Majority crowd as Republicans - the new Republican establishment. (in contrast, Carter was much more ephemeral - he did not reshape the Democratic Party)
In truth, the Republican reaction to Goldwater in 1976 (after the convention) and the Democratic reaction to Carter in 1976 (during the primaries) bear remarkable similarities to the Trump situation this time around.
Clinton? Please! He chaired the DLC, making him the ultimately insider. And GW Bush was the party establishment's candidate well before the 2000 primaries got underway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg
No kidding. Because JFK is not the first name that leaps to my mind when I think of non-establishment candidates.
I absolutely agree there. I have no idea where the JFK=outsider notion arose.
"Dumb Donald"? So, you're telling us that dumb people can easily become billionaires? Tell us how you made your first billion.
Well, our mission would be a lot easier if our Daddy made us President of the company few years after graduating from college, provided all the connections, and gave us a $8 million (in today's dollars) unsecured, unamortized loan to invest, and then left us an 9 figure inheritance. And gave us a cool last name to trademark and market (imagine if his last name were "Koslowski").
Well, our mission would be a lot easier if our Daddy made us President of the company few years after graduating from college, provided all the connections, and gave us a $8 million (in today's dollars) unsecured, unamortized loan to invest, and then left us an 9 figure inheritance. And gave us a cool last name to trademark and market (imagine if his last name were "Koslowski").
Mick
I'm sure if HRC was worth $4 billion we wouldn't be hearing from you.
They were outsiders because they weren't part of the party establishment and because they were actively opposed by their party establishments.
It's late, but for now, Jimmy Carter besides being the Democratic governor of Georgia was chairman of the Democratic Governor's Campaign Committee, and was the campaign chairman of the Democratic National Committee, if that isn't being part of the Party establishment I don't know what the hell is, which is at the root of the problem, a definitive definition of who or what this "establishment" is.
As for Clinton, the Democratic Leadership Council was established by "moderate" southern Democratic governors in 1985 (only two elections cycles from Clinton's 92 election) because they were outsiders of the Party's then dominate "left" wing. Ergo, Clinton was not part of the Democratic Party's Washington establishment if that is how we are defining establishment.
You really think Dumb Donald is going to get elected? At this point, he's not even going to be the nominee with a brokered convention
Remember the heaven's gate cult that committed mass suicide to be able to go to an alien planet when the comet swung by? Among them were doctors and lawyers.
Just because someone is successful in something doesn't mean he can't be a dumb person or even an idiot.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
