Which presidential cyclical theory do you like better?

[RR1997]

Cycle A:

Hoover-Carter: Both of these politically moderate presidents were/are considered failures. They presided over economic downturn, and because of them an era of liberalism/conservatism occurs.

FDR-Reagan: Both presidents considered heroes of the left/right, both ushered an era of liberalism/conservatism, and also "defeated" foreign enemies of the far-right (Nazi Germany), and the far-left (Soviet Union.)

Truman-Bush 41: Both vice-presidents of the previous administration, and were one-termers who had really bad approval ratings by the time reelection came along, and failed to live up to the previous president. Both presidents also ended tensions with past enemies (Truman: Nazi Germany/ Bush 41: Soviet Union), and created new tensions (Truman: the beginning of the Cold War, Bush 41: beginning of tensions with the Middle-East with the Gulf War.)

Eisenhower-Clinton: Both were moderate heroes, who ushered a decade of peace and prosperity.

JFK/LBJ-Bush/Cheney: Both Bush and JFK were members of a political dynasty, whose election to the presidency was against the vice-president of the former administration. The two vice-presidents were extremely uncharismatic, and lost the election by a razor-thin margin, despite the last president being very popular. Both JFK/LBJ and Bush/Cheney increased tensions severely with foreign enemies (Soviet Union/Middle-East), and ushered a decade of war (Vietnam/Iraq and Afghanistan.)

Nixon-Obama: See this thread: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=168317.0

So following this cyclical theory, a moderate Republican should win narrowly in 2016, and lose in 2020 to a far-left Democrat who ushers an era of liberal dominance. In the 2020's, tensions with the far-right Middle-East should end, and a new foreign enemy of the far-left should come around by the late 2020's.

Cycle B:

JFK-Reagan-Obama: The three of them are considered heroes by their respective parties, and ushered an era of liberalism/conservatism.

LBJ-Bush-(possibly Hillary Clinton?): One termers who failed to live up to the previous president.

Clinton-Nixon: Both presidencies saw a realignment in the electoral college, and both presidents were faced with major scandals (Watergate/Lewisnkygate)

Carter-Bush Jr.: Both presided through economic downturn and were/are considered failures.

So if this continues to be true, a Democrat should win in 2016, and lose in 2020 to someone whose presidency is similar to that of Clinton/Nixon.


I personally like Cycle A a lot better. Cycle A goes PERFECTLY from President Hoover to President Bush Jr. The only problem is that the cycle starts to die down starting President Obama. I see very little similarities between Nixon and Obama (although there are some). The comparisons between Hoover-Carter, FDR/Reagan, Truman/Bush, and ESPECIALLY Eisenhower/Clinton (this one works so well to the point where it's kind of scary). JFK/LBJ-Bush/Cheney also works pretty well.

Cycle B  is just meh IMO. It only work from JFK and on. I don't see the connection between Eisenhower, Carter, and Bush Jr. I also don't like the comparisons between Clinton and Nixon. It barely works. I do believe that Obama and Reagan do have quite a bit of similarities. LBJ-Bush Sr. also works pretty well.

What do you guys think?

[RR1997]

The only problem with Cycle A is that it works so well until Obama comes along. The Carter-Bush and the Obama-Reagan comparisons also work well. Hillary looks pretty unstoppable now and I don't see a Republican winning in 2016. I don't see another recession happening between 2017-2021 (since we just recovered from one), although the 2016 winner could lose in 2020 for other reasons. Obama could be a Nixon "done right" though.

[RR1997]

Hillary could be Gerald Ford and Bernie Sanders could be Ronald Reagan. Hillary narrowly wins the primaries against Bernie in 1976 and loses to the GOP candidate, and Bernie wins in 2020 and ushers a liberal era. Just like how Ford narrowly defeated Reagan in the 1976 election and lost to the Dem candidate, and Ronald won in 1980 and ushered an era of conservative dominance.

[RR1997]

I want to bump this.

Think of how many political outsiders are running in 2016 (Carson, Fiornia, Trump). I could see one of them being the Jimmy Carter in 2016, campaigning as a political outsider who's not corrupt unlike Nixon/Hillary. Then this person could be defeated by a Democratic Ronald Reagan in 2020. Ronald Reagan also ran in 1976, but then narrowly lost to Gerald Ford in the GOP primaries. Similarly, Bernie Sanders could narrowly lose to Hillary Clinton this election cycle, and then win in 2020.

[RR1997]

Going by this theory, Carson is the perfect Jimmy Carter. They're both political outsiders who are very innocent, good-hearted, and well-intentioned. I wonder who the Dem Ronald Reagan will be.