Coalitions

[hopper]

The context of this discussion originated here:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=266282.0

With the exception of TR's influence on FDR, those other two examples don't have much influence. Reagan never actually rolled back on desegregation to the extent Wallace wanted and instead pursued a policy in regards to civil rights issues, the drug war, and foreign policy that was very similar to Nixon's approach. Donald Trump cares nothing about the federal debt (and is likely to make it worse) which was one of Perot's signature campaign issues. In regards to trade, Trump did kill a trade deal that was unlikely to pass anyhow (and was likely more of a slight towards Obama if anything) but he's by and large governing like a standard Reagan Republican which is why even Mitch McConnell openly admitted that President Trump has essentially become a President Jeb Bush.

Also that cycle isn't coherent since the beneficiary Party isn't always the one to adapt said policies down the line:

1912: Third Party revolt benefits Democrat Wilson and later becomes Democrat FDR's policies. Works out.
1968: Third Party revolt benefits Republican Nixon and later becomes Republican Reagan's policies. Works out. (Although not entirely since Reagan's civil rights, drug war efforts, and foreign policy were more akin to Nixon than Wallace).
1992: Third Party revolt benefits Democrat Clinton (which it didn't-Perot drew from both Parties fairly equally by most accounts) and later becomes...Republican Trump's policies?) Here it skipped over Obama who should've adopted the policies of Perot in office according to this theory...but largely didn't. The GOP were the ones who forced him to pursue fiscal discipline when it came to the budget to deal with the national debt, and he tried ramming through a free trade deal near the end.

Most Perot '92 voters were Bush '88 voters similar to how most TR '12 voters were Taft '08 voters.

Both Obama and Clinton campaigned on opposition to free trade deals in '08, and Clinton opposed the TPP. Obama offered a Grand Bargain to the GOP in 2011. The GOP rejected that because they rejected Perot-style centrism, and wanted to go even harder-right.

Perot wanted to balance the budget through tax hikes on the wealthy combined with spending cuts. This was basically the Grand Bargain. Trump was the only GOP candidate who suggested tax hikes on the wealthy, although he didn't bring forth a formal plan. Perot opposed broad-brush Capital Gains Tax cuts. He only supported special tax credits for the purposes of entrepreneurship and r&d.

Probably "The Tea Party" or "Freedom Caucus" Republicans wanted to go farther right not the Republican Establishment at least I don't think the Republican Establishment wanted to go farther right.

[hopper]

The context of this discussion originated here:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=266282.0

With the exception of TR's influence on FDR, those other two examples don't have much influence. Reagan never actually rolled back on desegregation to the extent Wallace wanted and instead pursued a policy in regards to civil rights issues, the drug war, and foreign policy that was very similar to Nixon's approach. Donald Trump cares nothing about the federal debt (and is likely to make it worse) which was one of Perot's signature campaign issues. In regards to trade, Trump did kill a trade deal that was unlikely to pass anyhow (and was likely more of a slight towards Obama if anything) but he's by and large governing like a standard Reagan Republican which is why even Mitch McConnell openly admitted that President Trump has essentially become a President Jeb Bush.

Also that cycle isn't coherent since the beneficiary Party isn't always the one to adapt said policies down the line:

1912: Third Party revolt benefits Democrat Wilson and later becomes Democrat FDR's policies. Works out.
1968: Third Party revolt benefits Republican Nixon and later becomes Republican Reagan's policies. Works out. (Although not entirely since Reagan's civil rights, drug war efforts, and foreign policy were more akin to Nixon than Wallace).
1992: Third Party revolt benefits Democrat Clinton (which it didn't-Perot drew from both Parties fairly equally by most accounts) and later becomes...Republican Trump's policies?) Here it skipped over Obama who should've adopted the policies of Perot in office according to this theory...but largely didn't. The GOP were the ones who forced him to pursue fiscal discipline when it came to the budget to deal with the national debt, and he tried ramming through a free trade deal near the end.

Most Perot '92 voters were Bush '88 voters similar to how most TR '12 voters were Taft '08 voters.

Both Obama and Clinton campaigned on opposition to free trade deals in '08, and Clinton opposed the TPP. Obama offered a Grand Bargain to the GOP in 2011. The GOP rejected that because they rejected Perot-style centrism, and wanted to go even harder-right.

Perot wanted to balance the budget through tax hikes on the wealthy combined with spending cuts. This was basically the Grand Bargain. Trump was the only GOP candidate who suggested tax hikes on the wealthy, although he didn't bring forth a formal plan. Perot opposed broad-brush Capital Gains Tax cuts. He only supported special tax credits for the purposes of entrepreneurship and r&d.

Probably "The Tea Party" or "Freedom Caucus" Republicans wanted to go farther right not the Republican Establishment at least I don't think the Republican Establishment wanted to go farther right.

If the establishment didn't want to go further right, then they never would've abandoned Jeb/Kasich, instead, they tried to push harder-right tea party candidates in their places. In the end, the John Anderson wing of the party chose Kasich on their own volition, despite the establishment trying to discourage them from doing so.

Its not about the Republican Establishment  not wanting or wanting Kasich or Jeb its that Jeb got shown up badly by Trump in the Republican Primary Debates. Kasich-he lacked
"the populist zeal" that Trump had in a "change election cycle".  The Republican Primary Electorate was looking for a candidate that had "populist zeal" that was gonna stick up for "the little guy" sort of like Sanders was doing in the Dem Primary vs Hillary.

[hopper]

The context of this discussion originated here:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=266282.0

With the exception of TR's influence on FDR, those other two examples don't have much influence. Reagan never actually rolled back on desegregation to the extent Wallace wanted and instead pursued a policy in regards to civil rights issues, the drug war, and foreign policy that was very similar to Nixon's approach. Donald Trump cares nothing about the federal debt (and is likely to make it worse) which was one of Perot's signature campaign issues. In regards to trade, Trump did kill a trade deal that was unlikely to pass anyhow (and was likely more of a slight towards Obama if anything) but he's by and large governing like a standard Reagan Republican which is why even Mitch McConnell openly admitted that President Trump has essentially become a President Jeb Bush.

Also that cycle isn't coherent since the beneficiary Party isn't always the one to adapt said policies down the line:

1912: Third Party revolt benefits Democrat Wilson and later becomes Democrat FDR's policies. Works out.
1968: Third Party revolt benefits Republican Nixon and later becomes Republican Reagan's policies. Works out. (Although not entirely since Reagan's civil rights, drug war efforts, and foreign policy were more akin to Nixon than Wallace).
1992: Third Party revolt benefits Democrat Clinton (which it didn't-Perot drew from both Parties fairly equally by most accounts) and later becomes...Republican Trump's policies?) Here it skipped over Obama who should've adopted the policies of Perot in office according to this theory...but largely didn't. The GOP were the ones who forced him to pursue fiscal discipline when it came to the budget to deal with the national debt, and he tried ramming through a free trade deal near the end.

Most Perot '92 voters were Bush '88 voters similar to how most TR '12 voters were Taft '08 voters.

Both Obama and Clinton campaigned on opposition to free trade deals in '08, and Clinton opposed the TPP. Obama offered a Grand Bargain to the GOP in 2011. The GOP rejected that because they rejected Perot-style centrism, and wanted to go even harder-right.

Perot wanted to balance the budget through tax hikes on the wealthy combined with spending cuts. This was basically the Grand Bargain. Trump was the only GOP candidate who suggested tax hikes on the wealthy, although he didn't bring forth a formal plan. Perot opposed broad-brush Capital Gains Tax cuts. He only supported special tax credits for the purposes of entrepreneurship and r&d.

Probably "The Tea Party" or "Freedom Caucus" Republicans wanted to go farther right not the Republican Establishment at least I don't think the Republican Establishment wanted to go farther right.

If the establishment didn't want to go further right, then they never would've abandoned Jeb/Kasich, instead, they tried to push harder-right tea party candidates in their places. In the end, the John Anderson wing of the party chose Kasich on their own volition, despite the establishment trying to discourage them from doing so.

Its not about the Republican Establishment  not wanting or wanting Kasich or Jeb its that Jeb got shown up badly by Trump in the Republican Primary Debates. Kasich-he lacked
"the populist zeal" that Trump had in a "change election cycle".  The Republican Primary Electorate was looking for a candidate that had "populist zeal" that was gonna stick up for "the little guy" sort of like Sanders was doing in the Dem Primary vs Hillary.

The establishment, as in Mcconnell & Co. were actually pushing pretty aggressively for Kasich to exit the race. Don't pretend as if they didn't take sides.

I don't doubt politicians take sides in liking one presidential candidate over another for example. Kasich wasn't gonna win though it was basically Trump vs Cruz.