• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The End of the Reagan Era?

does the passage of landmark HCR legislation mark the end of the Reagan era?

  • Total voters
    17
  • Poll closed .
Chappy

Chappy

User
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Messages
2,443
Reaction score
733
Location
San Francisco
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
“I think you could say that, not to dramatize health care, it is the end of the Reagan era, in the sense of large-scale legislative initiatives. This is a marked departure from the Reagan era, which was really 30 years, I mean, a conservative consensus in the country.” — Mark Shields, columnist and PBS Newshour commentator¹​

What say you, does the passage of landmark health care reform legislation mark the end of the Reagan era?
 
Yes, I expect that government must now get serious about addressing the needs of our society including the fiscal solvency of its federal government. I expect we will pay more in taxes in the coming years and that government's involvement in environmental protection, consumer protection, food supply protection, and a host of other areas will grow because quite frankly for the capitalist system to work, we need effective regulations and protections.
 
I think that gives Reagan far too much credit.
 
Deficit spending that happened as a result of the "trickle down" theory is still going on, and even increasing. I say the Reagan era is just beginning.
 
The simple fact is that demographics are changing and the groups that traditionally support democrats are growing while the groups that traditionally support republicans are shrinking in relative size.

I am going to need to dig it up, but Nate Silver did an analysis where he overlaid the voting trends for Kerry and Gore with 2008's group sizes and found out that they would have won both elections with 2008's mix of voters. That trend is likely to continue to at least 2040.
 
Not exactly.

You still have many people in this country who identify with the Reagan years and Reagan broad-based ideology. Right now it is that they are coming to a collision with those who do not subscribe to it. Again, as Irving Howe said, Reaganite/Thatcherite/Kristolite conservatism versus Democratic Socialism. Though I realize I could offend some liberals who do not view their President as a subscriber to Democratic Socialism, which is fair enough, and point conceded to a degree.
 
Last edited:
Since Reagan's election, Democrats have never held both the Presidency and Congress for more than 2 years. I suspect that will continue to be true.

EDIT: The "Reagan Era" wasn't so much about Reagan himself as it was about the change in public opinion that came with him. Since public opinion wasn't for the health care bill, it is inaccurate to suggest that the bill ended the era unless it becomes popular later.
 
Last edited:
Chappy said:
“I think you could say that, not to dramatize health care, it is the end of the Reagan era, in the sense of large-scale legislative initiatives. This is a marked departure from the Reagan era, which was really 30 years, I mean, a conservative consensus in the country.” — Mark Shields, columnist and PBS Newshour commentator¹​

What say you, does the passage of landmark health care reform legislation mark the end of the Reagan era?
Click to expand...

I've always felt the Reagan era ended a few years after his Presidency. After that, it really hasn't been the same as him, and since he died, the Republican Party has taken a turn for the worse. Whether it'll go back to his standards remains to be seen, but thats different story.
 
I would say the Reagan Era ended after GHW Bush's tenure in the Presidency. When he got out, Clinton did quite a bit to reinvigorate government services. GW Bush didn't lessen government services, only outsourced them to no-bid contracts and supported corporate welfare. Now, because of distrust of private corporations, people want redundancy with the government. Personally, I think people don't want a society where services are either all private or all public. I think what this health care reform shows is that people want redundancy: if the private services won't fulfill their jobs then the people will want the government to do it for them.
 
I think the Reagan Era is characterized by the absence of large government initiatives and passage of tax cuts on top of tax cuts on top of tax cuts.

Health care reform is a big initiative and maybe the first of several, e.g., financial regulatory reform, immigration reform, energy policy reform, which are badly needed by the country at the beginning of the twenty-first century. And, I doubt that tax cuts outside of economic stimulation programs, are really in the offing at this point in the face of these enormous deficits.

The Reagan Era is truly over.
 
Last edited:
Chappy said:
I think the Reagan Era is characterized by the absence of large government initiatives and passage of tax cuts on top of tax cuts on top of tax cuts.
Click to expand...

Reagan and small government?
Since when?

Chappy said:
Health care reform is a big initiative and maybe the first of several, e.g., financial regulatory reform, immigration reform, energy policy reform, which are badly needed by the country at the beginning of the twenty-first century. And, I doubt that tax cuts outside of economic stimulation programs, are really in the offing at this point in the face of these enormous deficits.

The Reagan Era is truly over.
Click to expand...

You put way to much faith in your politicians.
It's a damn shame that adults still believe in fairy tales.
 
I didn't know there was such a thing as a "Reagan era". I just see him as another bad borrow and spend government growing president we're having to live down just like Richard Nixon and George Bush.
 
jacksbrat said:
I didn't know there was such a thing as a "Reagan era". I just see him as another bad borrow and spend government growing president we're having to live down just like Richard Nixon and George Bush.
Click to expand...

Reagan did all he could with the Congess he got. The same can't be said of Bush and Nixon.
 
IMHO, the Reagan era ended when the crazies, otherwise known as the Neocons, took power. But I also believe that the Reagan Republicans are merely on hiatus. They will rise again.
 
danarhea said:
IMHO, the Reagan era ended when the crazies, otherwise known as the Neocons, took power. But I also believe that the Reagan Republicans are merely on hiatus. They will rise again.
Click to expand...

Yea, right!!! Congress forced reaganomics down Reagan's throat.
 
Reagan is popular because Republican's keep pushing his name and pretending he was the best president of all time. By the time Bush Sr. dies of old age they will see the opportunity to push his name too since people will be tired of using Reagan.
 
Phantom said:
Reagan is popular because Republican's keep pushing his name and pretending he was the best president of all time. By the time Bush Sr. dies of old age they will see the opportunity to push his name too since people will be tired of using Reagan.
Click to expand...

I think it has more to do with their personal charisma than anything else.
So I'm not sure that Bush Sr. will be any kind of major president in the future.

Think of Kennedy, T. Roosevelt, Reagan, etc, as legendary figures.
They had excellent charisma and speech capabilities but in reality they had many failings that most people should criticize but almost never do.
 
Phantom said:
Reagan is popular because Republican's keep pushing his name and pretending he was the best president of all time. By the time Bush Sr. dies of old age they will see the opportunity to push his name too since people will be tired of using Reagan.
Click to expand...

No they won't. GHW Bush was a one-term and Newt Gingrich led the charge from the right against him. GHW got screwed by the GOP, so the GOP won't push his name at all. Instead, they'll push GW's and Jeb's names.
 
Reagan was a likable guy with a lot of charisma, but an unworkable plan for America. I voted for Reagan the first time around, thinking that he would scale back the size and power of the federal government. When that didn't happen, I didn't vote for him in '84.

He reminds me a lot of another president who has a lot of charisma and is able to rally people, but who has an unworkable plan for America.
 
Its too early to call it over.

It will depend greatly on 2012. If Obama wins, and he does so by staying his standard solidly left wing self rather than triangulating in the coming years ala Bill Clinton, then we'll have seen its end. 8 years of Obama and decidingly left wing politics will make sure of that. If that happens I think it'll take a "reagan-esque" type figure that is not able to simply be a leader of a movement but to flat out create a movement for the Republicans to get a grasp of control and shift the ideological actions of the country back the other direction
 
Dittohead not! said:
Deficit spending that happened as a result of the "trickle down" theory is still going on, and even increasing.
Click to expand...
Nothing about trickle-down - loweing taxes to incent econmic growth that leads to a larger tax base and thus greater revenues - necessitates deficit spending, increasing, decreasing or otherwise.
 
Goobieman said:
Nothing about trickle-down - loweing taxes to incent econmic growth that leads to a larger tax base and thus greater revenues - necessitates deficit spending, increasing, decreasing or otherwise.
Click to expand...

Not so long as spending decreases along with taxes. If lowering taxes increases revenue, then they must have increased spending even more to make up the difference.
 
Dittohead not!;1058650971 said:
Not so long as spending decreases along with taxes. If lowering taxes increases revenue, then they must have increased spending even more to make up the difference.
Click to expand...
Well, right - at least until the revenues increase.
The point is that the deficits were not 'the result' - that is, an unavoiadable, necessary component - of trickle-down as there are two (or more) parts to the equation.
 
Dav said:
Since Reagan's election, Democrats have never held both the Presidency and Congress for more than 2 years. I suspect that will continue to be true.

EDIT: The "Reagan Era" wasn't so much about Reagan himself as it was about the change in public opinion that came with him. Since public opinion wasn't for the health care bill, it is inaccurate to suggest that the bill ended the era unless it becomes popular later.
Click to expand...

I strongly disagree. Ronald Reagan was the lynchpin for his era, in that he was the leader, who brought the ideas of personal freedom and personal responsibility into government. But the Regan era was more about forging alliances with differing groups of Republicans, and even some Democrats, which resulted in many changes, especially the change from "Government is here to look after you and run your life" to "You pack your own chute, and you have the power to change your own life for the better". Finally, Reagan made people feel good about America, after the "Malaise" period of Jimmy Carter.

You give Reagan too little credit. There will never be another like Reagan, who made Americans feel good about their country again. Reagan was more than just a person. He became an ideology for millions. I don't know about anyone else, but I miss him.
 
Last edited:
Dav said:
Since Reagan's election, Democrats have never held both the Presidency and Congress for more than 2 years. I suspect that will continue to be true.

EDIT: The "Reagan Era" wasn't so much about Reagan himself as it was about the change in public opinion that came with him. Since public opinion wasn't for the health care bill, it is inaccurate to suggest that the bill ended the era unless it becomes popular later.
Click to expand...

What was the "change in public opinion" you speak of as it pertains to Reagan-Era politics?

Harry Guerrilla said:
I think it has more to do with their personal charisma than anything else.
So I'm not sure that Bush Sr. will be any kind of major president in the future.

Think of Kennedy, T. Roosevelt, Reagan, etc, as legendary figures.
They had excellent charisma and speech capabilities but in reality they had many failings that most people should criticize but almost never do.
Click to expand...

Such as? What do you see as character or agenda related flaws the should be addressed concerning an and all of the above former presidents you've mentioned?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom