That certainly fits more with what would seem reasonable Jackmannii. The mythology built around Reagan and the effects of history (Reagan certainly seems a larger figure today than he did in early 1980 I’m sure) make it difficult for someone who wasn’t there (well, to be fair, I was there but not particularly attuned to politics) to evaluate the claims.
I was questioning that a poll with a much larger sample size gave a better result, not that the polling in general showed a tie.
That said, Table 1 in your link gives poll results in the last two weeks of the election. They showed it being a lot closer then it ended up being, but Reagan was still pretty clearly the favorite, and in the last couple days the polls do a good job of reflecting the actual results.
That fits with what I said. The same technique give Obama a big win in 2008. He will have a tough sell that electing him this time will bring a change for the better. Any Republican that wises up or comes out of the woodwork with a message of hope will blow him out of the water.
Hate the rich, hate the homosexuals, hate the government unions, hate entitlements, hate taxes, hate the military, hate give backs, hate, hate, hate…
The American people are going to lose.
I was a high school kid in 1980. All of us were scared that if Reagan was elected we would all get drafted for WWIII with the Commies. :rolleyes:
One huge difference between now and '80 is that now the economy is in an upwards trajectory. Obviously many, many things could change that but if the unemployment rate keeps going down and especially if housing prices start to rise, Obama will just make his message about continuing the great work that they started.
Newt’s nomination, which I think ultimately won’t happen, will energize the hell out of the left more so than the right.
Quoted for truth. Reagan was indeed dismissed by many, including many on the left. It does not therefore follow that all dismissed-by-many candidates are going to be Reagan-like. Most of the time, there’s a reason a candidate is dismissed.
Personality-wise, I can’t think of any current politician less Reagan-like than Newt Gingrich. Optimism vs Pessimism, Self-deprecating humor vs. monumental arrogance. Reagan won elections among large electorates based on his personality, and sometimes in spite of his positions. Gingrich has only won elections among conservatives, and his success has been based on positions and in spite of his personality.
I don’t recall any salivating, but there were a great number of “Reagan Democrats” that crossed party lines to vote for the gipper. Of course, the parties were not so clearly divided then. In the South and West there were lots of deeply conservative Democrats, while the Northeast and Midwest fielded many moderate-to-liberal Republicans. The “Reagan Democrats” were mostly libertarian-leaning and states-rights types who happened to be registered Democrats simply because that’s what they’d always been - and their parents before them. Most of them were thoroughly disillusioned with Carter; Reagan’s neo-conservative message and bouyant personality resonated with them.
The Reagan mistique aside however, Carter lost that election because he didn’t get enough votes. It is easy to forget how truely dismal things were during the Carter years. Thousands of returned Viet Nam vets who couldn’t find jobs, (the county where I lived had a 29% unemployment rate), inflation eating up savings, the Ayatollah thumbing his nose at us and that horrible feeble attempt at hostage rescue. I believed then as I believe now that Jimmy Carter was a good, intelligent and thoroughly decent man, but he was damn sure star-crossed. The first presidential vote that 'ere I cast was in 1980, for Reagan. Young and politically naive as I was then I believed that Republicans were the best at national governence while Democrats did better at state & local level where an activist philosophy of government was more appropriate.
Yes, I still have enormous respect for Jimmy Carter even if he was a disaster.