Are the Democrats now the party of Reagan?
By: Matt K. Lewis (The Hill)
Donald Trump was elected President for the sole purpose of changing the political landscape. Trump defeated Reagan Republicans before he ever had a chance to take on Hillary Clinton. The 2016 Republican primary was a contest between the TEA Party (now Freedom Caucus) and Trump's new grassroots MAGA movement. Reagan Republicans were crushed early in the primary races by voters and donors. Trump has achieved what he was elected to do.
So, it's not too surprising that Reagan Republicans are looking to buy the Democratic Party. It is political money that will change the Democratic Party. Joe Biden wasn't forced off the ticket by voters. Joe Biden had to fall on his sword because the big donor money had dried up which scared the crap out of party leadership. And that's why Kamala Harris has suddenly assumed a Reaganesque political persona. Harris cannot afford to run on Democrats' status quo policy or principles for fear the money would dry up again. Kamala Harris and Democrats have been sucked (or, more appropriately, suckered) into the power vacuum that Donald Trump created in our politics.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A son of Bobby Kennedy has endorsed a Republican for president. Meanwhile, former Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) was among the prominent Reagan Republicans given a speaking role at the Democratic National Convention.
It's not exactly, to quote "Ghostbusters," dogs and cats living together…mass hysteria. But it's close.
The political realignment that began with Donald Trump's 2016 election has escalated, with the parties swapping some key parts of their brand identities, not to mention constituents.
Last week's DNC, for example, seemed to amplify many symbols and imagery formerly associated with Republicans — American flags, football and small-town life — while simultaneously eschewing lefty symbols and rhetoric.
This observation is not merely anecdotal. In critiquing Harris's convention speech, Bill Kristol observed that "The terms America, American, Americans were uttered [by Harris] 34 times; country or nation, 20 times; freedom, 12 times; opportunity, 6 times; Democrats or Democratic party, 0 times."
"Overall," Kristol added, "the vision was kind of Bill Clinton (with a touch of Jack Kemp) at home, and John McCain abroad, with a hefty dose of John F. Kennedy-Ronald Reagan patriotism throughout. Harris even offered a striking endorsement of American exceptionalism."
In the policy realm, Harris has also flipped toward conservatives on multiple issues, including fracking, Medicare for All and, most recently, a border wall.
If Harris can coopt the patriotic themes and policy preferences once associated with the GOP, it's only because Trump's MAGA movement abandoned them long ago.
To be sure, realignments happen over time. During the 20th century, the GOP went from being the "Party of Lincoln" to losing 80 to 90 percent of the Black vote. This latest realignment has been in the works since Trump became the GOP standard bearer.
Consider a few examples: Democratic support for Ukraine is more consistent with a Reaganite foreign policy than Trump's odd fondness for Vladimir Putin, which was evident long before the 2016 election. Trump's penchant for big spending actually exceeded even the Democrats' prodigious financial outlay. And Trump's character flaws and personal behavior (about which he has long been known to boast) were certainly more in keeping with Bill Clinton than the Gipper.
At this summer's Republican National Convention, Amber Rose, an adult-video actress and the organizer of a feminist protest called SlutWalk, was given a prominent speaking spot. RNC headliner Hulk Hogan, a man famous for his wrestling exploits, was once embroiled in a scandal over a sex tape that showed him with a friend's wife.
For old-fashioned Republicans, these are strange bedfellows.
On top of that, in recent days, Trump has promised to be "great for women and their reproductive rights." Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), his running mate, said that Trump would veto a national abortion ban.
Speaking of which, the one area where Democrats have not sought to woo conservatives is on abortion, which Democrats view as a key to winning elections in a post-Roe world. Apparently, Trump agrees with Democrats' strategic assessment, since he is refusing to make opposition to abortion a litmus test in 2024.
These are just a few examples of how Trump's Republican Party has abandoned turf that it once dominated.
Of course, this is all about trading voters. In exchange for alienating Reagan conservatives, Trump has become more appealing to new types of voters, many of whom were previously Democrats or apathetic nonvoters.
For example, Trump garnered the endorsements of RFK Jr. and former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii). These endorsements were obviously timed to blunt Harris's momentum, but these individuals (and we might as well throw in former Democrat Elon Musk, too) do have a constituency — dubbed "Rogan Democrats" by writer Jim Antle, after podcaster Joe Rogan — even if it is not a majority.
If you are a deeply committed conservative, the waters have been muddied, to put it mildly.
Sure, you can support your old "team" based on nostalgia, tribalism or preference for the elephant over the donkey. But don't expect a clear and consistent commitment to whatever principle or position you hold dear.
Instead of a clear left-vs.-right paradigm, the parties are attempting to redefine the parameters of the debate.
MAGA Republicans want to frame the contrast as between the insiders and the outsiders. It's the establishment and their "corporate media" buddies versus the masculine heroes who aren't afraid to tell you the truth as they see it, about vaccines, election interference or Ukraine, even if it means being canceled.
Meanwhile, today's Kamala Harris-Tim Walz Democrats want to frame itself as Team Normal vs. vulgarian weirdos and the "very online" edgelords and billionaire tech bros who mock "cat ladies."
Whose framing is right? Probably both. This isn't your father's Republican or Democratic Party. The old rules no longer apply.
Matt K. Lewis is a columnist, podcaster and author of the books "Too Dumb to Fail" and "Filthy Rich Politicians."
Tags
Who is online
457 visitors
It's up to Tim Walz to appeal to more liberal minded voters while Harris prostitutes her principles for big money donations. What will be interesting to watch is how the party of disadvantage maintains a Eurocentric policy agenda. Isn't NATO emblematic of white privilege? Doesn't the existence of Israel serve to pacify European guilt?
It appears that the mere presence of Trump in the political arena will heighten the conflict between Democrats' quintessential liberal ideals and pragmatic pecuniary concerns. In the end Democrats will be more concerned about their Ps than their Qs.
No
Reagan was a staunch fiscal conservative with the ability to reach moderate Democrats (Blue Dogs or Regan Democrats) on social and governance issues.
The Democrats of today are definitely not the party of Reagan.
Reagan cut taxes and ran up heretofore unimaginable deficits while saying he was fiscally conservative. There was nothing conservative about Trickle Down Supply Side Voodoo Economics. Reagan was always positive about America's future and unlimited possibilities in front of us. This is opposite of Trump's "Dystopian Shithole America". Harris' vision of unlimited hope and a bright future is Reaganesque!
Reagan won 44 states in 1980 and 49 states in 1984 - back to back landslide victories because he appealed to the moderates of both parties (hence Reagan democrats) and still had the support of the conservatives (the republicans). Like his policies or hate them - he had the support of the nation.
The debts he ran up are trivial compared to the past three administrations (Biden, Trump, Obama) -
There is absolutely nothing about Trump that would make anyone think of Reagen
Reagenesque brings to mind peace, tranquility and happiness while Trumpesque brings to mind a garbage dump or a junk yard