Our political Quote of the Day comes from Doug Mataconis who looks at Sarah Palin’s comments about Ronald Reagan and concludes that yes, she remembers Ronald Reagan — but seems to be missing an essential ingredient of who he was and why his appeal was so great that even some voters not inclined to agree with him were willing to hear him out (and be moved to support him):
The Ronald Reagan I remember was an optimist who spoke of America as being the “shining city on the hill,” and who, even if in the depths of the Carter Malaise believed that the country’s best days were ahead of it, a sentiment that appeared throughout his major campaign speeches in 1980. One of the reasons Ronald Reagan was successful was because he brought that message of optimism at a time when the American public was becoming increasingly pessimistic.
Modern-day conservative rhetoric, especially as practiced by the Palin’s and Glenn Beck’s of the world, seems to have thrown that Reagan optimism overboard in favor of a philosophy that seems to find enemies around every corner, and conspiracies behind every event. I don’t know what you call that, but it sure as heck isn’t Ronald Reagan, which just makes the efforts by such people to claim Reagan’s legacy as their own all the more pathetic, a point which was brought home with a vengeance recently thanks to comments from Reagan’s youngest son [Ron Reagan]…
Indeed, Reagan could energetically disagree with someone but didn’t paint all of his domestic foes as enemies of the United States who akin to villains in a James Bond movie, sitting around rubbing their hands as they plotted ways to end America as we know it. Reagan had an optimism and also came under fire for some off the wall comments. But his problems with language were often with accuracy versus some modern day conservatives who have a little problem with demagoguery. His optimism and willingness to engage politically without trying to whip up hatred is what made him win over the Reagan Democrats and get things done working with members of the other party. As historian Gil Troy has noted, Reagan also did plant some seeds that blossomed into modern day polarization.
But Troy has also noted that Reagan’s willingness to work with others and compromise put him in the class as (hold onto your hats conservatives) a moderate President. (Some details here..)
Today’s conservative talk show culture rhetoric — which is Palin’s style — is all about confrontation, demonization and all too often exclusion. Reagan wasn’t about to change the design of his tent. But he wanted it to be a bigger tent and was open to getting others in. Too many modern conservatives want a bouncer at the tent’s door to filter out those who might want in or to kick out those who are in and aren’t wearing the proper dress code (visible right wings). Reagan did indeed make people feel good and indulged in some happy talk but he also adhered to principles in which he believed; too many modern conservatives are out to make people fearful with the goal of scaring them so they will rush to the polls to support them to stop the described threat to their country and to support their own political sports team.
None of this is to suggest as some have that Palin can’t make it to the White House, given certain circumstances. But if she did she would be President of the Base by the Base and for the Base. Reagan sought to get the base and expand the base and stay loyal to his political tenets. Too many modern conservatives want to win with the base and keep the base pleased. That brings you right back to the rhetoric again required to please the base– which isn’t optimistic and conducive to building a bigger tent.
Reagan is a President who was not appreciated in his time or understood in his time.
Palin is understood all too well in her time — which is why she is tanking with independents and many thoughtful Republicans.
It’s hard to image Sarah Palin sitting down and seriously talking with the opposition, or even moderate Republicans when her idea of challenging questions is an interview with Sean Hannity.
Palin is to Ronald Reagan what the “new Darrin” was to the “old Darrin” in the classic TV show Bewitched.
Or what either Darrin was to Gilligan on Gilligan’s Island.
But I could be wrong. Email me about the trend of a huge number of Palin Democrats and I’ll revise this post.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.