When would Ike have switched Parties?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 07:31:21 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  When would Ike have switched Parties?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Poll
Question: ??
#1
1970s
 
#2
1980s
 
#3
1990s
 
#4
2000s
 
#5
2010s
 
#6
Never
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 65

Author Topic: When would Ike have switched Parties?  (Read 4000 times)
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: February 16, 2021, 08:12:09 AM »

I could see him being a Colin Powell like figure and endorsing Obama.

Maybe against Romney in 2012, tho I doubt it, but he certainly would have supported McCain in 2008.
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,391
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: February 16, 2021, 07:27:12 PM »

Am I correct in thinking that Eisenhower hated Robert Taft and helped sell the UN to Republicans?
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: February 16, 2021, 10:33:52 PM »

Am I correct in thinking that Eisenhower hated Robert Taft and helped sell the UN to Republicans?

Maybe in the sense that McConnell might hate Ted Cruz.
Logged
Agonized-Statism
Anarcho-Statism
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,802


Political Matrix
E: -9.10, S: -5.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: December 18, 2022, 12:22:56 PM »

Probably 2016, but I do wonder how he would react to Watergate.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,251


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: December 18, 2022, 08:54:04 PM »

He wouldn't have. Ike had a genepool Plains-German dislike and distrust of the Democratic Party; the only reason he was seen as a potential Democratic substitute candidate in 1948 was that this was not commonly known at the time. I don't agree with the idea that he wouldn't have any issue with Bush or with Trump at all, but I think he would chart a course much closer to someone like Romney or Liz Cheney than to the Lincoln Project if he were alive and politically relevant today.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderator
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: December 18, 2022, 11:42:45 PM »

He wouldn't have. Ike had a genepool Plains-German dislike and distrust of the Democratic Party; the only reason he was seen as a potential Democratic substitute candidate in 1948 was that this was not commonly known at the time. I don't agree with the idea that he wouldn't have any issue with Bush or with Trump at all, but I think he would chart a course much closer to someone like Romney or Liz Cheney than to the Lincoln Project if he were alive and politically relevant today.

Yea, I agree with this analysis, though it is hard to say just how some historical figure would react in a future environment. One thing I have been pressing back hard against lately is the underestimating of political divisions in periods of "political consensus". These always come across as down playing the divides that rose up to fill the vacuum or a generally dismissive stance towards a previous policy position because such is not well regarded by the mainstream today.

Just because a lot of Republicans were of moderate temperament and "accepting of the New Deal", doesn't mean that every Republican could have just have easily been a Democrat.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: December 19, 2022, 09:56:42 AM »

I actually don't think Eisenhower would've stopped being a Republican, however, he'd stop voting for Republicans at some point in the late 00s/early 10s.

I think it's a key distinction. I don't see Dwight Eisenhower becoming a Democrat, but I do think he'd stop actively supporting GOP candidates and just refuse to comment publicly on politics. (He actually gave quite a lot of cold shoulder in 1964 and did a lot of really embarrassing "damning with faint praise" to Goldwater that year)

I largely agree, but Trump might have pushed him over the edge. Ike disliked boorish people to boot.
Logged
Cassius
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,591


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: December 19, 2022, 10:39:00 AM »

Worth noting that another gene pool Great Plains Republican, Bob Dole, was the only Republican ex-Presidential candidate to endorse Trump in both 2016 and 2020, so I wouldn’t be surprised if Eisenhower had gone down a similar route.
Logged
King of Kensington
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,068


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: December 20, 2022, 12:33:12 AM »


I largely agree, but Trump might have pushed him over the edge. Ike disliked boorish people to boot.

So around the time of his 126th birthday.
Logged
Agonized-Statism
Anarcho-Statism
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,802


Political Matrix
E: -9.10, S: -5.83

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: December 20, 2022, 03:06:16 AM »

Have to reiterate, Watergate may have been important to him.
Logged
jojoju1998
1970vu
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,414
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: December 20, 2022, 05:36:25 PM »

The revisionist history around Eisenhower is pretty astounding. The only reason he kept taxes high was because he was a deficit hawk which was the conservative orthodoxy at the time as opposed to supply side. Truthfully I don't think he had strong enough beliefs on anything other then foreign policy to actively switch parties and while I can see him being critical of both W and Trump I think he would still be a Republican today.

In a way, however, Eisenhower was a Conservative in the One Nation Insitutionalist sense. No massive changes. Keep the nation together.

Those guys are long long gone.
Logged
TDAS04
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,475
Bhutan


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: December 28, 2022, 02:27:39 AM »

Ike personified the 1950s tranquility, not wanting such issues as civil rights to disrupt the national sense of unity and stability.  So yeah, he was pretty conservative.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,504
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: January 28, 2023, 10:40:32 PM »

Ike's son, Gen. John Eisenhower, endorsed John Kerry in 2004:

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2004/10/11/58915/-

Quote

Today many people are rightly concerned about our precious individual freedoms, our privacy, the basis of our democracy. Of course we must fight terrorism, but have we irresponsibly gone overboard in doing so? I wonder. In 1960, President Eisenhower told the Republican convention, "If ever we put any other value above (our) liberty, and above principle, we shall lose both." I would appreciate hearing such warnings from the Republican Party of today.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,504
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: January 28, 2023, 10:55:24 PM »

He wouldn't have. Ike had a genepool Plains-German dislike and distrust of the Democratic Party; the only reason he was seen as a potential Democratic substitute candidate in 1948 was that this was not commonly known at the time. I don't agree with the idea that he wouldn't have any issue with Bush or with Trump at all, but I think he would chart a course much closer to someone like Romney or Liz Cheney than to the Lincoln Project if he were alive and politically relevant today.

Yea, I agree with this analysis, though it is hard to say just how some historical figure would react in a future environment. One thing I have been pressing back hard against lately is the underestimating of political divisions in periods of "political consensus". These always come across as down playing the divides that rose up to fill the vacuum or a generally dismissive stance towards a previous policy position because such is not well regarded by the mainstream today.

Just because a lot of Republicans were of moderate temperament and "accepting of the New Deal", doesn't mean that every Republican could have just have easily been a Democrat.

Eisenhower was not a Conservative Republican.  He intensely disliked the GOP Western and Midwestern conservatives in the party.  He hated Sen. William Knowland (R-CA) and was happy when he left the Senate to run for CA Governor in 1958 and lost.  He generally did not think much of the Republican Party in general.  His favorite politicians appear to be Southern Democratic conservatives, and he personally cultivated them.  If you look at the brain trust of the Eisenhower Administration, you will see that most of the people who were "somebody" in the Administration were very singular partisans; the only Republican they cared about was Eisenhower.

Another myth was the idea that Eisenhower would have been more dovish on Vietnam.  Despite his dislike for the Western conservatives, Eisenhower endorsed Goldwater.  One reason was that Ike was hawkish on Vietnam.  He was invited into meetings with LBJ on Vietnam in 1965 and in each of those meetings he was unreservedly hawkish and urged LBJ to go for victory.

Eisenhower, himself, was something of a racist.  He was not a Lincoln Republican on Civil Rights.  It was Eisenhower that first cracked the Solid South in 1952, carrying 5 states in the peripheral South, and it was Eisenhower that put the brakes on integration.  He was sympathetic to the South's desires for more time to integrate, although he did send troops to Little Rock.  Eisenhower was not a segregationist and did not support Jim Crow, but he was willing to advocate slowing the pace of integration in the South.  I suppose that was part of his legislative strategy; Southern Democrats controlled many key committee chairs in both Houses and Eisenhower wanted his program to get through.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,592
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: January 29, 2023, 02:47:22 PM »

Probably 2016, but I do wonder how he would react to Watergate.

I think he would have refrained from public comments but privately favored for Nixon to step down. Perhaps he wouldn't have been all too surprised. I think he never really liked Nixon anyway. I guess Ike still would have preferred for him to be pardoned and would have endorsed Ford in the 1976 primary.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: January 29, 2023, 06:19:54 PM »

Never, but I could see him voting against Trump before reverting back to DeSantis.

He'd still be a Republican downballot all years.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: February 11, 2023, 10:43:43 PM »

He wouldn't have. Ike had a genepool Plains-German dislike and distrust of the Democratic Party; the only reason he was seen as a potential Democratic substitute candidate in 1948 was that this was not commonly known at the time. I don't agree with the idea that he wouldn't have any issue with Bush or with Trump at all, but I think he would chart a course much closer to someone like Romney or Liz Cheney than to the Lincoln Project if he were alive and politically relevant today.

Yea, I agree with this analysis, though it is hard to say just how some historical figure would react in a future environment. One thing I have been pressing back hard against lately is the underestimating of political divisions in periods of "political consensus". These always come across as down playing the divides that rose up to fill the vacuum or a generally dismissive stance towards a previous policy position because such is not well regarded by the mainstream today.

Just because a lot of Republicans were of moderate temperament and "accepting of the New Deal", doesn't mean that every Republican could have just have easily been a Democrat.

Eisenhower was not a Conservative Republican.  He intensely disliked the GOP Western and Midwestern conservatives in the party.  He hated Sen. William Knowland (R-CA) and was happy when he left the Senate to run for CA Governor in 1958 and lost.  He generally did not think much of the Republican Party in general.  His favorite politicians appear to be Southern Democratic conservatives, and he personally cultivated them.  If you look at the brain trust of the Eisenhower Administration, you will see that most of the people who were "somebody" in the Administration were very singular partisans; the only Republican they cared about was Eisenhower.

Another myth was the idea that Eisenhower would have been more dovish on Vietnam.  Despite his dislike for the Western conservatives, Eisenhower endorsed Goldwater.  One reason was that Ike was hawkish on Vietnam.  He was invited into meetings with LBJ on Vietnam in 1965 and in each of those meetings he was unreservedly hawkish and urged LBJ to go for victory.

Eisenhower, himself, was something of a racist.  He was not a Lincoln Republican on Civil Rights.  It was Eisenhower that first cracked the Solid South in 1952, carrying 5 states in the peripheral South, and it was Eisenhower that put the brakes on integration.  He was sympathetic to the South's desires for more time to integrate, although he did send troops to Little Rock.  Eisenhower was not a segregationist and did not support Jim Crow, but he was willing to advocate slowing the pace of integration in the South.  I suppose that was part of his legislative strategy; Southern Democrats controlled many key committee chairs in both Houses and Eisenhower wanted his program to get through.

In his own words, Eisenhower disliked the “conservative wing” of the GOP due to his preference for pragmatism, not due to their ideology.  Eisenhower embodies pragmatic (rather than rabid/ideologue) conservatism perfectly, IMO.  His reputation as a “moderate” that was anything less than a standard conservative of his day is really misguided, and it’s usually things like nitpicking one nice thing he said about how unions should literally be able to exist or not knowing that the interstate system was a defense spending project, lol.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,504
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: February 12, 2023, 07:33:15 AM »

Probably 2016, but I do wonder how he would react to Watergate.

I think he would have refrained from public comments but privately favored for Nixon to step down. Perhaps he wouldn't have been all too surprised. I think he never really liked Nixon anyway. I guess Ike still would have preferred for him to be pardoned and would have endorsed Ford in the 1976 primary.

Stephen Ambrose wrote biographies of both Eisenhower and Nixon.  In many ways, Ike regarded Nixon as something of a son.  Eisenhower, however, was the kind of father the early 20th century produced; a critical Patriarch whose son could never live up to Pop's high standards. Nixon was faithfully loyal to Ike, and Ike never doubted that.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: February 12, 2023, 04:06:36 PM »

He wouldn't have. Ike had a genepool Plains-German dislike and distrust of the Democratic Party; the only reason he was seen as a potential Democratic substitute candidate in 1948 was that this was not commonly known at the time. I don't agree with the idea that he wouldn't have any issue with Bush or with Trump at all, but I think he would chart a course much closer to someone like Romney or Liz Cheney than to the Lincoln Project if he were alive and politically relevant today.

Yea, I agree with this analysis, though it is hard to say just how some historical figure would react in a future environment. One thing I have been pressing back hard against lately is the underestimating of political divisions in periods of "political consensus". These always come across as down playing the divides that rose up to fill the vacuum or a generally dismissive stance towards a previous policy position because such is not well regarded by the mainstream today.

Just because a lot of Republicans were of moderate temperament and "accepting of the New Deal", doesn't mean that every Republican could have just have easily been a Democrat.

Eisenhower was not a Conservative Republican.  He intensely disliked the GOP Western and Midwestern conservatives in the party.  He hated Sen. William Knowland (R-CA) and was happy when he left the Senate to run for CA Governor in 1958 and lost.  He generally did not think much of the Republican Party in general.  His favorite politicians appear to be Southern Democratic conservatives, and he personally cultivated them.  If you look at the brain trust of the Eisenhower Administration, you will see that most of the people who were "somebody" in the Administration were very singular partisans; the only Republican they cared about was Eisenhower.

Another myth was the idea that Eisenhower would have been more dovish on Vietnam.  Despite his dislike for the Western conservatives, Eisenhower endorsed Goldwater.  One reason was that Ike was hawkish on Vietnam.  He was invited into meetings with LBJ on Vietnam in 1965 and in each of those meetings he was unreservedly hawkish and urged LBJ to go for victory.

Eisenhower, himself, was something of a racist.  He was not a Lincoln Republican on Civil Rights.  It was Eisenhower that first cracked the Solid South in 1952, carrying 5 states in the peripheral South, and it was Eisenhower that put the brakes on integration.  He was sympathetic to the South's desires for more time to integrate, although he did send troops to Little Rock.  Eisenhower was not a segregationist and did not support Jim Crow, but he was willing to advocate slowing the pace of integration in the South.  I suppose that was part of his legislative strategy; Southern Democrats controlled many key committee chairs in both Houses and Eisenhower wanted his program to get through.

In his own words, Eisenhower disliked the “conservative wing” of the GOP due to his preference for pragmatism, not due to their ideology.  Eisenhower embodies pragmatic (rather than rabid/ideologue) conservatism perfectly, IMO.  His reputation as a “moderate” that was anything less than a standard conservative of his day is really misguided, and it’s usually things like nitpicking one nice thing he said about how unions should literally be able to exist or not knowing that the interstate system was a defense spending project, lol.

Keep in mind Eisenhower helped mentor Reagan too so there were some conservatives that he liked

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard/unearthing-the-eisenhower-reagan-connection

Quote
When Dwight Eisenhower left the White House in 1961, he didn't divorce himself from politics. He worried about the future of the Republican party, and this led him to Reagan. From 1965 to 1968, he advised Reagan—and not just on foreign affairs and national security policy. His guidance also focused on the practical politics of running for office. Ike was the teacher, Reagan his pupil. They met in person four times, once at Ike's farm in Gettysburg and twice at the former president's winter home in Palm Desert, California. The fourth location is unknown—at least, Kopelson hasn't nailed it down. And they communicated by telephone and by mail.

Quote
Eisenhower took a special interest in Reagan: He thought his vice president, Richard Nixon, was the most qualified Republican to be president; but he feared that Nixon, after losing to John F. Kennedy in 1960, couldn't get elected in 1968. But Reagan could, thus Eisenhower's eagerness to help. Ike never saw Reagan as too conservative; quite the contrary. He watched Reagan's famous television speech ("A Time for Choosing") for Barry Goldwater in 1964 with an expert's eye. "Looking and listening to Reagan, a new Republican star in the making, Eisenhower liked what he saw and heard," Kopelson writes. He saw Reagan as "an important part" of rebuilding the GOP after the Goldwater loss.

Quote
Ike decided, at some point, to "launch Reagan personally well beyond the governorship in Sacramento and potentially right into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue," Kopelson writes. After their June 1966 meeting in Gettysburg—the summer before Reagan won the governorship—Eisenhower told reporters that "you can bet he will become a presidential possibility." Ike's endorsement "defused any accusations that Reagan was an extreme far right-wing candidate."

The Gettysburg session lasted two-and-a-half hours. "Eisenhower gave Reagan specific and detailed military strategic and tactical lessons," writes Kopelson. He said that Americans should always fight to win, deploy overwhelming force, and make threats. In Korea, he had threatened to use nuclear weapons; in Vietnam, Ike told Reagan that he had advised Lyndon Johnson to "mine Haiphong harbor." He favored bombing North Vietnam "hard" and the "hot pursuit of troops or aircraft into havens."

Logged
Death of a Salesman
Rookie
**
Posts: 238
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: February 15, 2023, 05:58:37 PM »

Much like Bob Dole, Ike would have been too conservative to ever actually switch. At a stretch, he might have voted for McMullin in 2016, but I would really doubt that. A more interesting question is who he would have supported in GOP primaries.

1972: Nixon
1976:  ??
1980: ??
1984: Reagan
1988: ??
1992: ??
1996: ??
2000: ??
2004: Bush
2008: Romney?
2012: Romney
2016: ??
2020: Trump
Logged
Snow Belt Republican
Ragnaroni
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,352
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.97, S: 1.74

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: February 16, 2023, 05:03:16 AM »
« Edited: February 16, 2023, 05:14:10 AM by Ragnaroni »

Much like Bob Dole, Ike would have been too conservative to ever actually switch. At a stretch, he might have voted for McMullin in 2016, but I would really doubt that. A more interesting question is who he would have supported in GOP primaries.

1972: Nixon
1976:  ??
1980: ??
1984: Reagan
1988: ??
1992: ??
1996: ??
2000: ??
2004: Bush
2008: Romney?
2012: Romney
2016: ??
2020: Trump

1980 : Reagan (he was from the conservative wing of the GOP).
1992 : Bush (i feel like Ike would back the incumbent after he wins).
1996 : Buchanan
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,080
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: February 18, 2023, 09:02:16 PM »

Much like Bob Dole, Ike would have been too conservative to ever actually switch. At a stretch, he might have voted for McMullin in 2016, but I would really doubt that. A more interesting question is who he would have supported in GOP primaries.

1972: Nixon
1976:  ??
1980: ??
1984: Reagan
1988: ??
1992: ??
1996: ??
2000: ??
2004: Bush
2008: Romney?
2012: Romney
2016: ??
2020: Trump


I'd guess something like:

1976: Reagan
1980: Reagan or GHW Bush
1984: Reagan
1988: Dole or GHW Bush
1992: GHW Bush
1996: Dole
2000: McCain
2004: GW Bush
2008: Romney or McCain
2012: Romney
2016: Kasich
2020: Trump [reluctantly]
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,251


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: February 18, 2023, 09:44:19 PM »


I think this is overcorrecting from the idea of Moderate Hero Sexgod Ike. Dole would have been plenty conservative for him.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: February 18, 2023, 10:29:49 PM »

For what it's worth, I believe Eisenhower was going to run as a Democrat if it looked like MacCarthur would get the Republican nomination.
Logged
Snow Belt Republican
Ragnaroni
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,352
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.97, S: 1.74

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: February 19, 2023, 04:31:31 AM »


I think this is overcorrecting from the idea of Moderate Hero Sexgod Ike. Dole would have been plenty conservative for him.
Well I thought of assuming that Ike would stay where he was politically in say 1960 and stuck to those values and vote accordingly.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 13 queries.