Republicans -- Good At Winning, Not So Much At Governing

On Sunday, John McCain guaranteed he would win the election. It's understandable why he may think victory is still within his grasp.

In recent history, Republicans have proven most adept at winning elections. They do it by following a simple formula. They prey on voters' fears. And, it turns out, though you can't fool all of the people all of the time, you can fool a whole bunch of them fairly often.

McCain's latest campaign tactic is a mainstay of the GOP repertoire; accuse your opponent of being a "big spending" Democrat. Yet, in truth, both parties are big spenders. In fact, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush expanded federal spending more than any other presidents in history. But while the Republicans spent the money on war and on handouts to rich folks, today's Democrats would like to provide middle class tax breaks and health care. So, when Republicans say, as they often do, that people shouldn't rely on the federal government, is it just true in their case? Is "big government" bad? Or is it merely Republican government that's bad?

Best of a bad lot
John McCain calls himself a "Teddy Roosevelt" Republican. It's no surprise that he needs to reach so far back into the past. In the 100 years since Roosevelt was president, rarely has a member of the GOP led with distinction. Dwight Eisenhower was probably the best of the lot. But his list of accomplishments (expanding Social Security, creating the Interstate Highway System, promoting civil rights legislation and warning us of the dangers of the "Military Industrial Complex") would have Republicans screaming "socialist" today.

In the past century, Republicans have produced arguably three of the worst presidents in history: Herbert Hoover (who led the nation into the Great Depression), Richard Nixon (the only president ever forced from office in disgrace) and George W. Bush (where do I begin?).

Then there's Ronald Reagan. His "trickle down" economics, since copied by George W. Bush, led to two recessions, two of the largest banking melt downs in history and at least two stock market crashes. Harding, Coolidge and Ford? Hardly worth a mention. Indeed, a Republican federal government has done little for the people.

Best of the best
On the other hand, Democrat Franklin Roosevelt is widely considered to be one of the greatest presidents in history. He pulled America through the Great Depression, promising we had "nothing to fear but fear itself," and led us through World War II. He brought us Social Security, unemployment insurance, the FDIC and the SEC and expanded worker's rights. And he had something in common with Barack Obama. Republicans accused him of being a Marxist too.

Two other 20th century Democrats are considered by historians to be among our greatest presidents. Woodrow Wilson guided the nation through World War I and created the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Reserve System. Harry Truman, led the nation through very difficult times, including the end of World War II. He helped to rebuild postwar Europe, began the fight to stop the spread of communism, pushed for civil rights legislation and helped establish the CIA, NATO and the United Nations.

Though John Kennedy was in office less than three years, he was an inspirational leader who encouraged Americans to "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." He created the Peace Corps, pushed for the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and civil rights legislation and scored a major victory in the cold war when he stared down Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis. He also sent America to the moon, igniting an era of technological innovation.

Even two of the most troubled Democratic presidents had significant policy successes that impact us even now. Lyndon Johnson brought us the Civil Rights Act of 1964, appointed the first African American Supreme Court Justice and gave us Medicare and Medicaid. Jimmy Carter achieved peace between Israel and Egypt, two nations that had been at war for 30 years and haven't fought since.

Bill Clinton wasn't half bad either if I recall correctly.

Republicans are eager to get elected. Democrats are eager to lead. John McCain has been using the worn out, though once effective, Republican campaign book. If he gets elected, unfortunately he'll be using the ineffective Republican leadership one.

More articles on the campaign
John McCain Through The Looking Glass
Either McCain Is Lying Or He Doesn't Know What Socialism Is

Comments

[Janet A]

LOL... would seem Republican voters are either just very loyal, or traditionalists - voting as their forefathers have - just because! Why do they keep getting in with such a record?

Thanks for another excellent, informative piece of writing, the quotes you have used are some of the finest words around, and Roosevelt's "nothing to fear but fear itself", is good advice... maybe the Republican 'fence sitters - dangling legs' could try and broach that 'fear' and cross the borderline into the daylight of self examination, open questioning of what is on the table, and make a discerned vote!

Thanks Bruce.

[kpostero]

This is a wonderful piece on historical perspective. I am especially glad to see "trickle-down economics" laid bare. If those in the religious right and others who are more centrists and even some who are left-leaning souls hadn't fallen for the Conservative Con and thus easy prey for the Republican machine, today's politics (not to mention the politics of the past decade) would be far different.

[mommadona]

How can you be a part of something and run it when you hate it?

Ass-backwards.

If Republicans hate government so much, WHY DO THEY WANT TO RUN IT? To RUIN it?

Waaaaait a minute....­hmmmmmmmmm­m

Grover Norquist: 'Field Marshal' of the Bush Plan
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20010514/dreyfuss

[SeniorTour]

A very well thought out and written post. Yeah, all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt.

[Jesster]

Thank you Bruce, for putting the history of the last 100 years of Republican and Democratic presidency in a thoughtful perspective. While "conservative" rhetoric holds a certain appeal to America's self-image of toughness - it's frankly no way to actually govern in the best interests of the vast majority of people/Americans.

It DOES take a village/community to govern effectively. Ironically, the party with a large base of followers who prefer to believe in creationism over evolution, in fact fosters the most ruthless form of "survival of the fittest" - which by their definition means shrewdness, greed and power-lust. That is no way to "lead" a great (beacon of light) society/nation.

The creation of a strong "middle class" has been the singular finest and most productive achievement of our country. The relentess effort to dismantle the great middle is leading to our accelerated decline. The truth is that progressivism is the necessary check and balance to unbridled greed, shortsightedness and unfettered capitalism with no accountability.

Americans may be seduced by the macho approach of John Waynes - but we all fare much better when we send Mr. Smith to Washington.