Pat Buchanan (1999) == Donald Trumpt (2016)

Was Pat Buchanan simply too far ahead of his time ?

I was looking at very old threads and found this: Pat Buchanan? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
“Pat Buchanan is an extremely conservative Republican who takes the general ultra-conservative positions (anti-gun-control; anti-abortion; anti-immigration) and extrapolates them to ends that many observers find absurd (such as advocating that a great big wall be put up on the U.S.-Mexico border to prevent illegal Mexican immigration). He’s also a big gas-bag, giving exhorting, inflammatory speeches that play on the theme of America being under attack, but such speeches are remarkably thin on actual substance, once you get by the rhetoric. It’s the combination of his conservative politics and his combined paranoid and over-wrought speechifying that leads to the comparisons to Hitler – such as Molly Iven’s comment that while she understood his address, she imagined it sounded better in the original German. I don’t think she (or other commentators)really think he’s a Nazi.”

Another post in the same thread:

IMHO, Pat Buchanan represents the worst of both worlds: he’s socially conservative and fiscally liberal (well… fiscally protectionist anyway). Some of his economic ideas sound downright un-Republican. He vehemently opposes any sort of free trade policy. As such, he appeals to white, blue-collar, christian folks who decry the moral decay of the nation but who are also afraid of the big corporate fat-cats shipping their jobs to Mexico (not to mention being afraid of Mexicans coming here and taking their jobs). I also find it amazing that he blatantly uses the phrase “America First”, thereby associating himself with the organization back in the '30’s (which included some Nazi sympathizers) that wanted to keep the U.S. out of World War II.
Obvious parallels to the current president – why did policy platform work for “Trump 2016” but failed for “Buchanan 2000” - was Pat just too far ahead of his time ?

In fairness, Trump also talked a lot about RADICAL . . . ISLAMIC . . . TERRORISM, and that pitch really couldn’t work the same way pre-9/11.

This is absolutely true, although I would say Trump had the additional advantages of his celebrity and running more strictly on immigration and trade rather then as a hardcore social conservative like Buchanan which allowed to actually win by winning over the more secular working-class voters of the Rust Belt and Northeast. Ironically though when Trump ran for President in 2000, he referred to Buchanan as a “neo-Nazi”:

Buchanan is too much of an intellectual to appeal to that type of voter. Trump has this breezy self-confident reality-TV personality that goes over much better.

When I was in 8th grade in '98-'99 I had a Christian day school teacher (conservative denomination) who made a passing observation that he liked Buchanan’s ideas or at least some of them but Buchanan wouldn’t be electable with the general public because he was a religious man.

Baffled me at the time since I take things too literally…I guess one could say Buchanan and Trump are probably on opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to sincere uncompromising adherence to faith.