Will Reagan Democrats Revolt?

[dobak]

http://www.msnbc.com/news/980129.asp?0cv=CB20


WHEN EVEN good news is greeted with such pessimism, there is trouble afoot. Political analysts say the fatalism gripping workers here and in countless other American manufacturing towns is a threat to George W. Bush’s re-election and a sign that the vaunted “Reagan Democrats” who crossed party lines a generation ago may be shopping around again.

......

This year, however, after a loss of millions of manufacturing jobs over the past several years and no indication that the economic recovery is reversing that trend, political analysts on both sides of the aisle believe the Democrats have a shot at winning back the hearts and minds they lost to Ronald Reagan.



Sounds like good news if we capitalize on it

[Davis_X_Machina]

1. There are no Reagan Democrats.

That was nearly twenty-five years ago.

They either died or became real Republicans.

We are in danger of fighting the last war.

[catzies]

3. You're right. It just gives them an excuse to bring up his name again.

Because we all know the secret to the success of a good lie is in the repetition.

[roughsatori]

5. Thank you for posting what I was to exasperated to type

Clark may be enough like Reagan to have gotten the "Reagan Democrats" votes 25 years ago. Too bad we don't have time machine to send him back there, because I think he will not motivate the Democratic base to get out and vote this time.

[Bok_Tukalo]

6. Democratic Base Sitting Out 2004?

Unlikely.

Even if Lieberman were the nominee.

[Tinoire]

8. Don't bank on it. We will not allow ourselves to be black-mailed into

accepting a Reagan Democrat candidate just because Reagan Democrats are having a little tiff with their boy-king George.

If Reagan Democrats hate their boy so much, let THEM be ABB and vote for the person the real, the loyal Democratic base wants.

Let me gently spell this out- I am not voting for a Republican Lite just because Reagan Democrats are having a falling out with the Republican Party.

The Democratic base is nothing Reagan Dems should bet on.

[Voltaire99]

11. Nor will I, or many whom I know, vote for Republican-lite.

Let the DLC be very clear on this. We despise it for its accomodation, its appeasement, its intellectual and moral bankruptcy.

The temper of progressives must not be misjudged. I'm not sure how to spell that out clearly enough to the concessionary "center," but I hope it's listening to the warnings. "Anybody but Bush" will not be enough. "Nobody like Bush" - and yes, that would preclude the atrocious Lieberman - is the bottom line.

[Loyal]

19. And YOUR boy(Kucinich)

is at 1 fucking % in the polls. Why cater to you when all of our candidates are top tier? Hmm? :shrug:

[JasonBerry]

20. Your Avatar and Our Candidate

Back in the lean years of Yankeedom....did you cease being a Yankee fan? A "fair weather" friend? Some of us stand behind our beliefs and our candidates much like people stand behind their teams. For many of us, Kucinich is right....and we'll fight for those beliefs and advance the cause of our candidate without raising a finger to the wind -- or looking at the daily tracking polls.

[Loyal]

21. I've been a Yankee fan forever, bro,

so your argument doesn't hold water.

[JasonBerry]

24. Point should be well-taken

No, you MADE my point.....some of US will be with Kucinich until HE says it's over.

[stickdog]

14. What about the typical non-voting should be Democrats?

You know, about 80% of the non-voting population?

[xxqqqzme]

7. my reaction also

what reagan democrats? How old R they now? Sounds like somebody got caught in a time warp. Hello, it's 2003! And st. ronnie is just as buggy now as he was then. I firmly believe reagan's deteriorating mental health was/is the corporate media's best kept secret.

[GainesT1958]

2. If we run the right candidate...

And I'm not talking about one in particular here--though I have MY favorite, of course :eyes:-- we can do just what we did in 1992, only by a bigger margin. And after Selection 2000, the Repubs will have NO standing saying "there is no mandate" for the new Dem. president! :D

You know, just like they forfeited the "moral high ground" they claimed they had against Clinton with their support of Der Gropenator!

:kick:

B-)

[ramapo]

9. It's the economy, It's the economy, repeat 1000x

Labels don't matter.

Voting blocs don't matter.

All that stuff we like to talk about, and complain about, doesn't matter..

Most people don't care that Reagan was senile or that Bush was installed in office. Or that the rich get a big tax cut. Or that the environment is getting worse by the day. Or that we've made no progress on the energy problem in 30 years. Or that healthcare is an absolute mess. Or that there are severe infrastructure problems (schools, sewer, etc). And that education has been turned into a political punching bag.

People don't care that Cheney, et. al. are cashing in big time. Or that the US is a debtor nation that is totally dependent on the rest of the world for our survival. Most don't care that our foreign policy is a giant cluster-*** and the US has lost so much standing over the past three years.

But....

If enough people are losing their jobs and houses. And if many others are afraid that the same can happen to themselves.

Then Bush loses.

That's all there is to it.

[wuushew]

4. Bush is a fool is he thinks he can win the rust belt

The best chance he has is winning Ohio which he won last time. There is no way in hell he is getting most of those 150 electoral votes.

[osaMABUSh]

10. Reagan Dems exist & are not dead - even if Ronnie seems to be

I'm in my 40's and many of my Catholic Dem friends jumped ship while in their 20's in 1980 to vote for Reagan. Many are still Dems but vote repuke. They had this dillusion of living like a Republican.

I'm not sure if they've all come full circle yet but I'd guess many are ready to abandon Shrub especially if Clark is the nominee. I believe he is a Catholic which should help sway some of them.

I think it would be fitting that Reagan die before the next election so that we can literally and figuritavely bury his myth just in time to kick * out of office.

[Stuckinthebush]

12. I voted for Reagan in 1984

I know...I have been repenting ever since.

But, I haven't voted for a Republican since. I wonder if many "Reagan Democrats" were like me at the time - young, naive, and taken in by a media made illusion? Well, whatever the case, most Democrats that I know who "accidentally" voted for Ronnie in 1984 or 1980 regret it and now vote Democratic. Those that stayed Republican are neo-cons who will not abandon W.

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

13. My parents were "Reagan Democrats" too

And the Gipper was the last Republican either one of them ever voted for.

I think a lot of people were just voting their pocketbooks at the time, despite the fiction that the neocons would like to believe that Reagan ushered in some Golden Age of American Wonderfulness or what have you. I don't think they've ever let go of the idea that Reagan was "the best president we ever had!" and both Republicans who have been elected (or selected) since then basically got their support on Reagan's coattails. The only reason Bush 41 was elected was because he was Reagan's vice president, and republicans had to take half a loaf in that case.

Bush 43 has attributes in his public persona that I think strike a lot of people as Reagan-like --- his continual harping on single, extremely broad, black-and-white themes of absolute good (us) vs. absolute evil (them) are a page right out of the Reagan playbook. "The Axis of Evil" might sound like a ridiculous idea (mostly because it is) but it's important to remember that this is the intellectual level that a lot of people function on. They don't want to know that the world's problems are very complicated. They don't want to know that most political issues are painted in shades of gray. Bush 43 allows them the luxury of overlooking those things by his extremely puritanical and simplistic public approach.

I think most of the people who voted for Reagan went one of two ways --- they either came to their senses or they became neocons. The neocons are as powerful as they are because they have a utopian vision driving them (although I would hardly describe a world run by Tom DeLay as a utopia) --- never underestimate the power of idiocy combined with ideology. The neocons envision a world that is run a certain way, and that we're not all that far off from. The world that, for example, Dennis Kucinich envisions could be described as utopian as well --- we would all certainly be a lot better off with him as president, obviously --- but it introduces too many new concepts for the average asshole to assimilate. The neocons' utopia is based on ideas that have been beaten into a large amount of Americans since the day they were born (religious fundamentalism, jingoism, frontier justice, etc.) and so their utopian vision is always going to resonate with a lot of people.

I'm going to go cry now.

[JasonBerry]

15. We need to be careful

"I think most of the people who voted for Reagan went one of two ways --- they either came to their senses or they became neocons."

I have seen this a lot on DU.....we need to be very careful about saying things like the post above. The other option is they became just plain old Republicans. The term "neocons" is thrown around rather lightly. The term has a very specific meaning relating to a group of intellectuals on the right who work diligently to further the goals of Israel by co-opting the foreign policy of the United States.

"Anti-semitism?" Not hardly. The "neocon" label has been used since the seventies for this very specific group of people. They have organized into pockets of great influence in this administration (the White House and Department of Defense primarily) and public policy think tanks (the most notorious and well-known being PNAC).

We cannot allow them the cover of speaking for all Republicans -- or even all conservatives. Many moderate Republicans find the neocon agenda abhorrent - as do many "true" conservatives. The only way to hold the neocons accountable is to prevent their assimilation into the Republican Party at-large. ALL conservatives are not "neocons" -- hence the name. Let's be careful not to allow the neocon agenda to get away with becoming "mainstream." The fact is -- there are "neocons" in the Democratic Party! In fact, many good liberals on domestic issues throw their lot in with the neocons in their views on American foreign policy.

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

16. To clarify

People who are just plain old Republicans fall under the heading of those who came to their senses, in my opinion.

[Fovea]

17. Too late

They didn't assimilate, they co-opted the term conservative and destroyed the moderate core and the paleoconservate branch.

The rest are cowed and compliant, except Jim Jeffords. Even McCain is a very subdued critic of Bush.

[proud patriot]

18. Rate the article at the very bottom please

Thanks :hi:

[Davis_X_Machina]

22. "Many are still Dems but vote repuke...."

The technical terms for such folk is "Republicans".

How can you 'still (be) Dems, but vote repuke'?

[leesa]

23. Anyone stupid enough to vote for Reagan has gotten what they deserved

Reagan started this mess and now they aren't happy??? This is the only possible outcome of the policies that loser put in place

[The_Casual_Observer]

25. If they voted for Reagan they are too stupid

to know why any of this has happened. So, they are still fine with Reagan.