Why do Republicans more often claim to be the "Party of Reagan" than the "Party of Lincoln"?
One doubled our national debt in two terms and one was probably the greatest President in our nation's history, endured a Civil War and ended slavery once and for all.
Shouldn't Republicans tout their greatest President, Lincoln, instead of one who did immense damage to our country, such as Reagan?
- Anonymous10 years agoBest Answer
It's hard to say considering...
- Reagan's popularity frequently dipped below 50% during his first two years.
- Reagan began the systematic dismantling of regulation that was meant to prevent Republican greed from collapsing the economy, as it did to bring on the first Republican Great Depression, and did again at the end of Bush’s term.
- With Reagan, Republicans wasted no time in giving the rich a big wet kiss by shifting the tax burden (once 90% under that Socialist Dwight D. Eisenhower) to the middle class. A large number of tax loopholes were written into the tax code that catered to special corporate interests. Reagan’s next move was to bust unions, and stagnate wages while simultaneously increasing credit to give the illusion of wealth.
- "Trickle-Down" worked exactly as intended, to benefit the wealthiest at the expense of working class Americans. It increased economic inequality and shifted most of America's wealth to the top.
- Republicans then went after education – doing away with civics classes and making education another brass ring that could be grasped only by accumulating massive debt. Debt served to create a society of indentured servants who may think they work for XYZ Company, but really work for the bank.
- One of the last pieces of this recipe for Oligarchy was to deregulate the media. Reagan did away with media ownership laws as well as the Fairness doctrine, which made propagandists like Rush Limbaugh possible. The airwaves were then flooded with pro-corporate, anti-worker Republican propaganda to keep the people stupid enough to vote Republican.
- Inequality grew by leaps and bounds under Reagan.
- As governor, Reagan oversaw the largest tax increase in Californian history. Democratic Governor Jerry Brown cut back the tax rate when he came to office.
- As president, Reagan expanded the federal government by about 90%. Reagan allowed the welfare state to enlarge and the military budget to explode causing monstrous budget deficits and government growth that dwarfs government growth under Clinton, even when Clinton had a Democratic Congress.
- Reagan also bombed Libya, put the "war" in War on Drugs, allowed the continuation of Selective Service registration (despite his campaign promise to end it), helped the Khmer Rouge terrorize Thailand, imposed brutal trade sanctions on Nicaragua, funded the murderous brutal Contras, sold missiles to Iran, gave assistance to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, and lied to the American people.
- The foreign policy of Ronald Reagan did more to impoverish and kill the poor and helpless humans of the world than any world leader before or since - with the possible exception of GWB. He was going to defeat communism (which was already falling of its own weight) and he didn't care how many children were burned alive or how many people starved to death on the way.
- In 1988, Reagan’s last year in office, outlays as a percent of GDP were running at 21.3% with a deficit of 3.1% of GDP. The budget deficit over Reagan’s eight years averaged 4.2% and ran as high as 6.0% in 1983. (In 1980, the last year of Jimmy Carter’s presidency, government outlays were running at 21.7% of GDP and the budget deficit was 2.7% of GDP.)
- Reagan raised taxes twice in 1982, and then raised them again in 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, and 1987. In spite of all those tax hikes, Reagan didn't grow his way out of the deficits caused by his 1981 tax cut.
- It took an eighth tax hike from George Bush Sr. in 1989, a ninth in 1990, a tenth from Bill Clinton in 1993, and then another economic boom to erase Reagan’s deficit. Sure, a strong economy helped, but without all those tax increases the deficit would never have disappeared.
-Reagan increased unemployment from 7% to 11% in his first three years. The unemployment rate did not get better until his fourth year.
- Reagan taxed the wealthy at 50%. (Governing to the right of Reagan, Obama taxes the wealthy at 35%.)
- The practice of rewarding incompetent cronies with gigantic useless contracts for unneeded military hardware was elevated to art form under Reagan. Reagan's legendary megalomania, hubris and abject ignorance led him to believe the tales of any crackpot who managed to slither past the goons who comprised his inner circle. Star wars missiles, atomic shields, space-age death rays, you name , he would fall for it and blow billions of your tax dollars on it.
- Ideologically, he was a hater and an imperialist and far-right loony-tune. He hated the poor. He hated gays. He hated leftists. He hated communists - and he was pretty sure you were one if you disagreed with him. He never met a social program he didn't scorn. He never met an American in need he wanted to help. His response to the AIDS epidemic is one of the most sickening cold-blooded expressions of pure murderous political evil in the history of the earth.
- Anonymous10 years ago
For the purposes of disclosure I am a Democrat.
I would like to point out that Abe Lincoln was not originally a Republican. He actually was a Whig, but the Whig Party had a cleansing of sorts just as the modern day Republicans are going through. Both of which I might add involved the far right throwing our member of the party whom they considered to be not conservative enough.
I also would like to point out that Ronald Reagan was elected by Republicans who defected from the Democratic Party, although they were more conservative than most Republicans at the time. We now call them Neo-Cons.
Needless to say that the modern day Republican Party is neither the "party of Lincoln" nor the "party of Reagan". It's sad really that both parties are turning against moderates like John Warner and Chuck Robb. Both of whom were moderates that put getting done the business of the country a head of party ideology. Hopefully one day the moderates from both parties and independents will regain prominence.
- CasimirLv 44 years ago
They would be better off if they got involved with the GOP at a local level and took over the party from the inside. The election laws are far too slanted in favor of the 2 party system to make any other plan viable. But that would require organization, something that libertarians are never good at. They are also not good at running marketable campaigns. While I respect your case, and the right to argue against public schools, drug laws and libraries, that stance isn't going to win votes. People like me like those services.
- Anonymous10 years ago
Read up on Nixon's "southern strategy" from the 1960s where he brough on board disaffect white southern democrats opposed to Johnson's Civil Right's Act & Great Society programs. The Republicans have been the party of Nixon/Reagan for the past 40 years. A very successful strategy I might add.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- NighthawkeLv 510 years ago
The Republicans of today have nothing in common with Lincoln.
Here are a handful of quotes by Lincoln that great socialists such as Marx, Trotsky, Lenin, Eugene Debs and Albert Einstein would be proud to embrace. But what Republican of today would embrace any of these statements?
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.” -- Abraham Lincoln
"All that harms labor is treason to America. No line can be drawn between these two. If any man tells you he loves America, yet he hates labor, he is a liar. If a man tells you he trusts America, yet fears labor, he is a fool." -- Abraham Lincoln
"The strongest bond of human sympathy, outside of the family relation, should be one uniting all working people of all nations, tongues and kindreds." -- Abraham Lincoln
- Boss HLv 710 years ago
Because they are more closely the party of Nixon, which Reagan followed in those footsteps.
Reagan talked a lot of BS that gained support from both sides. That is the Republican dream to be able to convince everyone that they are on their side regardless what they do after they get the power.
if the cold war ended, we wouldn't still be playing who has the biggest nuke game.
- DanielLv 710 years ago
They changed from the Party of Lincoln to a right wing neo con hate party.
The Democrats changed from a very southern racist party to the party that led us out of the civil rights era.
The parties have changed, It is well documented in history as the REPUBLICANS made a conscious decision in the 1900's they did not need the black vote.
- Anonymous10 years ago
They used to call themselves the party of Lincoln, but that moniker is just stupid for our time period. They aren't the party of Lincoln. Reagan is much closer to what they stand for today.
- Anonymous10 years ago
The truth is, they used to call themselves the party of Lincoln, but it got old. It would be like Democrats calling themselves the party of Roosevelt.
- Jay MLv 510 years ago
Same reason Democrats don't say their the party of the Dixiecrat's.......We basically flipped ideology's somewhere near the 40s and into the 50s as well
- Anonymous10 years ago
They admire Reagans constant speech of having smaller govt while he tripled the national debt.