Why Obama Should Channel the Gipper
Forget FDR. Reagan is the presidential role model Obama needs now.
It was Barack Obama's first official joke as president-elect. At his postelection press conference, Obama was asked if he had talked to "any living ex-presidents." He replied, "I've spoken to all of them that are living," and then quipped, "I didn't want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any séances." Actually, as first lady, Nancy Reagan consulted an astrologer for guidance, not a medium for a connection to the other side. Afterward, Obama called her to apologize for what he called a flip comment. But if there were to be a séance at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Obama would do well to ask for Ronald Reagan.
As Obama prepped for his presidency, many among the politerati suggested he study the opening months of Bill Clinton's first term, in part to avoid Clinton's early errors. But the new president might do better to look at the last time someone rode a grassroots movement into town and promised wholesale change. Reagan both wowed Washington and bent it to his will—at least at first—and he did so in a manner that veteran Reaganites say Obama can emulate and even improve upon.
"The chief parallel between Obama and Reagan," says David Gergen, who served as White House communications director during Reagan's first term, "is that they raised expectations, and each had the capacity to play inside and outside games."
Reagan's aim, says Edwin Meese, a longtime aide who came to Washington with Reagan, was, of course, "to bring change to Washington—but he went out of his way to indicate he was not hostile to the people of Washington." Case in point: Shortly after arriving in DC for the transition, Reagan accepted an invitation to a dinner party at the Georgetown home of Katharine Graham, the publisher of the Washington Post and the doyenne of permanent Washington. After the soiree, the Wall Street Journal noted that a photograph of Reagan embracing Graham would upset conservatives. Sure enough, right-wing leader Howard Phillips groused that if "the Washington establishment is happy with Ronald Reagan, then you should be unhappy with Ronald Reagan."
But as Reagan charmed the city—"I remember him going to a lot of dinner parties," Meese told me—he filled his administration with a mix of old DC hands who knew how to navigate the corridors of power (James Baker and Caspar Weinberger) and outsiders he'd worked with as governor of California (Meese, Michael Deaver). "It was a good mix of fresh perspective and seasoned expertise," recalls Ed Rogers, who held various White House positions during the Reagan years.
Reagan's first months as president could be instructive for Obama in another way. The new president assumed office determined to pass a dramatic economic package that included draconian cuts in social spending ("I'm trying to undo the Great Society," Reagan wrote in his diary) and deep tax cuts reflecting his fervent belief in supply-side economics. The Democrats controlling the House vowed to resist; Speaker Tip O'Neill fulminated that Reagan was "soaking the poor to subsidize the rich." So the old actor did what he did best: He hit the airwaves, delivering televised speeches urging his supporters to pummel Congress. (Meese notes that Reagan was one of the first governors to hold weekly press conferences, an attempt to communicate more directly with constituents.)
Reagan also whipped up his beyond-the-Beltway backers. To pressure lawmakers in their home districts, White House political director Lyn Nofziger, his deputy, Ed Rollins, and Elizabeth Dole, who headed the White House public liaison office, worked with the network of right-wing citizens groups that Richard Viguerie, Paul Weyrich, and others had been building for years. Says Gergen, "Reagan had a well-mobilized base. He could go on television on a Wednesday and by Thursday morning, thousands of telegrams and calls were going into the offices of members of Congress." The message: Do what the Gipper says. "Out of the box, Reagan was creating broad national support," says Kenneth Khachigian, his chief speechwriter early on. "It was critical to get moving and not let the other side develop too much resistance."
Meanwhile, the White House schemed with savvy allies on Capitol Hill to set up votes to the president's advantage. And Reagan personally lobbied hundreds of members of Congress, paying special attention to the Boll Weevils in the House—conservative Southern Dems who in 1980 had seen Reagan bag more votes in their districts than they had.
In the end, it all worked—the outside pressure, the inside maneuvers. O'Neill could not keep his caucus united against Reagan. Congressional Democrats "say they're voting for [Reagan's plan] because they're afraid," Rep. Toby Moffett (D-Conn.) complained at the time. The Boll Weevils broke with their party and gave the president what he called "the greatest political win in half a century."
Twenty-eight years later, ex-Reaganites note that along with oratorical skills that rival the Great Communicator's, Obama has something Reagan could not have dreamed of—the Internet. (See "Shift + Control.") Imagine if Reagan had been able to send a text message to millions of supporters immediately after a speech: "Have you contacted your representative and senator and told them to pass the Economic Recovery Tax Act?"
From his very first staffing decision—picking the take-no-prisoners, fiercely partisan Rahm Emanuel to be his chief of staff—Obama signaled that he would be playing a hard inside game. "Washington is a machine that must be operated by a skilled operator," notes Ed Rogers. But, as Gergen says, Obama "also has an army on the outside that can pound on the gates of Congress. This is the first time we have a president who understands the power of communication and understands the Internet."
For Obama, Khachigian says, the key takeaway from the Reagan experience ought to be that "it was clear you couldn't get this fairly revolutionary plan in place in the midst of a difficult economy unless there was some kind of clamor back home." Reagan engaged his supporters and made them feel they were helping with the heavy lifting. Referring to a televised speech Reagan gave right before a House debate on his tax cuts, Khachigian, who worked on the address, cites a key passage: "I've not taken your time this evening merely to ask you to trust me. Instead, I ask you to trust yourselves...It's been the power of millions of people like you who have determined that we will make America great again. You have made the difference up to now. You will make the difference again." Obama, Khachigian points out, could practically lift lines like these when it comes time for coaxing legislators to get with his program.
Reagan's favorite saying, Khachigian adds, was "If they won't see the light, we'll make them feel the heat." He suggests that Obama keep that in mind: "He's got political capital in the bank. Now is the time to spend it. If he becomes cautious, he'll get eaten alive." Noting that Obama, like Reagan, has a political base that is also a movement, Rogers cautions that the new president will need "people from the outside who are not mentally corrupted by the incrementalism that has infected Washington. Reagan got elected to change the world, not to manage the government."
Clearly, Obama has pondered how a chief executive can bring about a big shift. During the primary campaign, he noted that "Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not." And Gergen says, "I'm told by some of the Obama people that Obama is very interested in the Reagan story." For anyone hoping Obama can pull off the change he's promised, that's a good sign. Too bad a séance can't be arranged.
Page 1 of 1 
This fascination with Ronald Reagan is utter BS. I was in the Marine infanty when Reagan was president and from where I stood he didn't do a damned thing for anyone except to enrich and expand the military-industrial complex. My unit didn't have enough money to even buy blanks - we ran around in the boonies going bang bang with our M-16s. He's also the first president to publically launch a war against Americans with his BS War on Drugs that continues to this day and is responsible for spraying untold tons of poisons all over Central and South America. Reagan was a pig and should be among the last that Obama should seek to emulate or channel. The only people who believe his fairytale about Reagan building up the military either weren't there or never served a single day in uniform. I'm sure my buddies who were killed in Beirut would agree.
Ronald Reagan started the long, painful slide to where we are today. He has been surpassed on the Worst Presidents list, but that hardly makes him worthy of emulation.
Even so, I suspect you're right: Obama WILL channel Reagan, which is the very last thing this country needs. And, like Reagan, we'll all be looking back on Obama thirty years from now wishing he'd stayed in Illinois.
I think you guys are missing the point entirely. Corn is only suggesting Obama emulate Reagan in using his grassroots movement to push Washington in a certain direction. I think that's what fascinates people about Reagan. Yes, most (if not all) of his decisions were horrible for just about everybody, but he was able to move political mountains, something other presidents have not been able to do. I think Obama is infinitely smarter and more worldly that Reagan ever was. If he can channel that power, than he'll do much better things with it.
Leviethan, I didn't miss the point; I know exactly what Corn was saying. *I* remember the doddering old fool that charmed the witless, swooning Fourth Estate in his role as "great communicator"; it was THAT shabby persona, coupled with lots of well-placed pork (Star Wars, etc. etc.) that "moved mountains" in Washington. Corn suggests Obama follow that path, i.e. Business As Usual. Sorry, but no amount of "good" can EVER come from emulating any feature of Bonzo's second banana, not even with all the skills of Madison Avenue at your disposal.
But, again, the comparison/analogy is apt: Obama has already shown that he'll "play by the rules", with Social Security one of his first targets. He's ALREADY channeling Reagan, flush with the same stinking qualities that sorry sap embodied.
Reagan and his aides had an ideological objective, as David Corn points out. Obama, regretfully, has explicitly rejected ideology, and particularly the ideology of his progressive supporters and much of his base, to be "post-partisan." His aides and advisors are, almost without exception, the old Clintonites on domestic and foreign affairs. As his announced economic stimulus policy declares he is adopting many bad Republican and Business objectives of tax rebates, and business tax relief. Hard to generate enthusiastic pressure from your "partisans" when you want to be anti'partisan
Reagan's main gift, his legacy to the American people in regards to the current economic crisis, is the conservation notion that deficits don't matter. I'd be inclined to think that Bush took that one to heart, if he had a heart. Thanks be to Reagan.
Forget Reagan.
Obama should emulate Carter (with a lot more guts) and Clinton (with no scandal)
I actually agree that Obama would do well to emulate Reagan, but its not possible. Reagan had principals, Obama has none. Reagan had experience and knew what he wanted to accomplish, Obama talks change and hope, but doesn't have a clue. Reagan was honest and determined to do his best for the American people, Obama comes from Chicago the capital of corruption. I wish Obama the best because the country needs it, and hope spring eternal, but if he's got Reagan qualities he's keeping them well hidden!
valwayne you must be extremely bummed that Obama not McCain wa selected president.
Reagan was a good actor, could read his lines and was able to charm people, almost a prerequiste for being an elected official.
He was the first to suggest that deficits don't matter and I think if you asked Greenspan at this point about that he might disagree with Reagan.
When Reagan entered office we had a 930 billion national deficit and increased it to 3.2 trillion deficit. And Bush following in his footsteps increased it from 5.6 trillion to 10 trillion. The Republicans wanted to shink the government to the point they could drown it in the bathtub and it seems that to be what their ultimate legacy will be, except that not only will the do in the government but our country as well, thank you very much Semper Fi
Something that few people see is that the successful presidents have more in common among them than among unpopular presidents or candidates that lose elections. Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan and Clinton had more in common among themselves than among losing candidates of it´s same party. Clinton had more in common with Nixon or Reagan than with Carter or Mondale.
Interesting reading, David Corn.
Obama is already equipped with the most powerful juggernaut of technologically-savvy supporters that has ever existed. He should be able to tap into these people (and has already gotten at least 2 initiatives going, the issue ranking website and the job recruiting applications) to push his agenda at Congress. I took myself off his mailing list, but my wife stayed on and she gets emails from Obama ASKING FOR MONEY(??!?) on a regular basis.
Obama has already eroded support from the progressive wing of the party by his run to the right. In fact, he's in direct resonance with the righties on many of the wedge issues and some of the core issues. FISA, abortion, Iraq, single payer health care, tax cuts, faith-based initiative, and many others.
So I'd suggest that if Obama wants to tap into that base that elected him, he'd best stick with the People's agenda, not the lobbyist agenda. Otherwise, the machine may figure out a way to turn on him.
-Wexler
Um...a lot of pish and some piffle. Reagan gets a lot of credit for "ending" he Cold War. He couldn't have done it without all the history between 1945 and 1981.
Also, in the wake of the Beirut barracks bombing, he lobbed a few shells into the hills and then declared victory and came home (metaphorically). That single action gave credence to the validity of bombing which has since become the mainstay of Islamic fundamentalists.
If that's what you want Obama to channel, you've been smokin' somethin'.
Oh, come on! Ronny was the first fully scripted pres. in my lifetime. Sure he had a higher I.Q. than the current learning disabled president puppet, Bush the younger, at least until that time while still in office when Ronny's Alzheimer's became obvious. But please, get real. Barak should channel any number of office holders, all in office prior to the military/industrial/corporate takeover (a.k.a. coup de etat) that began in earnest in 1947. But Ronnie? Pleeeeease!
David Corn has completely lost the plot. I am an Australian and have followed the Obama campaign from the primaries to election day and had nothing but the highest hopes for the renewal of the US. But now we are told that Reagan is to be the role model for the incoming administration , if this is to be the case then it is game over for the rest of the world. Reagan was a fool particularly loathed for his "Reaganomics" theory of trickle down wealth distribution. He is as little deserving of emulation as our "Man of Steel" John Howard is deserving of the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
The best that can be said of Reagan's time in the White House is "Reagan Slept Here."
Over 200 'appointed' officials, the people they 'picked' as 'the man/woman for the job,' had to resign under criminal charges to escape prosecution, including Edwin (WedTech) Meese, the highest law enforcement officer in the United States' government.
They 'reformed' welfare by pushing people, not up and out the door at the top of the stairs, but back out the door they came in, the deficiencies that made them need subsidization unremedied and unprevented. Some 7 million Americans became, not just poor, but destitute, homeless.
The only thing Reagan and his cronies are good for is a perfect example of 'fascism,' as defined by Mussolini, 'a collusion of government with big companies.' The Reagan years are a good example of a bad example.
As we are seeing in 2009 their misleadership was ultimately bad for companies and individual Americans, and a predatory perversion of government and the American ideology that we are yet to recover from. Remember, Reagan was the first President to endorse "The Alito Veto," Presidential signing statements that nullify the Congress, and thereby, the Constitution.
Reagan's arming of Saddam Hussein, and encouraging the world to get in on the money Iraq had to spend on Weapons of Mass Destruction is the Reagan legacy that became the George W. Bush legacy still plaguing the American people in 2009.
valwayne, some say Reagan was the worst president after Georgie boy and you think that he had principals and honor? is that the same honor that Georgie boy has? And since when Repugs are honest? wake up fool!
Baloney! Reagan, an experienced, mediocre actor, was a mouthpiece for the big corporations and moneyed interests. He had a few hot sayings that he memorized but probably did not understand. Let us hope that Obama does infinitely better.
What is interesting about Reagen is that he could take credit for the fall of Communism and the breaking of the wall that divided Germany. The problem with that is that our following president's thought that was part of their job. I have read nothing in our Coonstitution that says we are to spread Democracy to the world and, sadly, our Country is now in the same position that Russia was in trying to police the world by military expansionism. Our reason seems to be the same, as well, and that is control of the worlds energy resources. The Hawks have really screwed things up bigtime!
The worst column yet from Mother Jones, which is losing the edge of critical opposition. How insiderish could this be - to get quotes from David Gergen and other Reagan aides. This is sub-DLC, like the James Woolsey hagiography a few issues back. Make up your mind, Ms. Jeffrey and Ms. Bauerlein - drive this magazine into the Obama/neo-liberal ground, or support independent journalism.
Obama is young and intelligent and siding with the peoples. I think that Reagan was the worst sort of President and not what Obama would wish to follow. The reason is that Reagan was a political reactionary, and did evil things such as funding the contras of Nicaragua with tax-payers money that murdered 245,000 Nicaraguan peasants-workers, and students. He hated socialism and thereby overthrew the democractically elected government of Nicaragua. Further he destroyed Patco, the air traffic controller democratic worker controlled union. He was a reverse Robin Hood and looted the public treasury to take from the common people and give to the rich corporations. He was part of the klu- klux clan and did all in his power to destroy the black liberation movement everywhere that it raised itself up in America. While he did that he posed as a patriot. His version of law was to support the military-industrial-prison complex and follow the pollution path that implies. He was not know for supporting the movement for renewable energy that can and must end fossil fuels before they destroy the entire livability of America and the planet. Obama is seriously opposing the unjust wars and illegal violence that goes on in Iraq against the living and working conditions of the Iraqi people. He opposes Guantanamo Bay and the growing legalization and practice of torture by the U.S. Imperialist military. He appeals to the common people, and has appointed a Vice-President that is in favour of protecting a single payer universal medicare system for the forty-five million American commoners that are not covered now. No folks, Obama would not follow Reagan nor Reaganomics because he comes from the commoner class himself,( his father was s shepard) and has felt the bitter sting of right wing bossist arrogance. It is too soon to judge his full moves, for as he says there is only one president at a time, and Bushco still has 8 days to go. In all my political living and working I am still fearful of those eight days, because of the practice of Bush Jr. legalizing foreclosures (by executive decree) on all who oppose his lying wars, his legalization of electronic spying, his legalization of torture and flights to rendition to torture and who knows whatall he intends to do next. I am just saying give peace and Obama a chance before judging him, as he is genuine in seeking to unite America again. The path I would recommend that he follows is to support and appoint people from IVAW, Code Pink, trade unions, and socialist America, and mercy mercy release Mumia-Abu-Jamal, and the move nine, Troy Davis, and Leonard Peltier. Those people are totally innocent of the charges, and are jailed because of the unjust war, and illegal violent suppression of the commoner people for just living and working conditions. End pollution wars, not endless wars for more pollution.
Interesting article. It's good to hope.
Like I hope that Obama's administration will have a zero body count unlike the previous presidents. At least the lowest body count.
I really hope Obama can move politcally like the Reagan administration did. Just in a good direction.
As Isobel states the Reagan administration was responsible for over 200,000 innocent men, women and childrens deaths in Nicaragua alone. Some of them nuns and priests. Each administration has their Nicaraguas.
I hope that Obama doesn't have his Nicaragua.
What are you smoking? Regan's only principles were helping the greedy and stomping on the constitution. He is the reason this country is in such a predicament today. Great Communicator of bull[deleted].
How about Mother Jones channel the Mother Jones that existed during the Reagan years?
I think the article aptly discusses Reagan's ability to mobilize the public and suggests that Obama learn from that behavior, not Reagan's political ideologies. Reagan was so brilliant at passing his agenda that it is still an integral part of our society today. Perhaps Obama could use Reagan's example to make his agenda as well entrenched.
Corn and others should just start the Obama Party. They dont seem to care what the does or how he does it--just be yourself, President Obama! We love you no matter what!
Where did you GO, Corn??
Yuk...
I know that he is trying to say that Reagan was "brilliant" (what bull[deleted]!!) but, I just cant stop the projectile vomiting everytime i hear Reagan's name.
I wish people would stop talking about the old basterd.
OMG, what a long and strong
OMG, what a long and strong discussion here folks. Mike at the vertical project review guide.
I think I'm gonna be sick.
I think I'm gonna be sick. Reagan was a Nazi, Obama is more a fascist.
Let's hope Obama never leans that far right.
That's funny...I thought he
That's funny...I thought he had already channeled Reagan.
reagan/ obama
reagan could read the speeches, as a third tier actor he could nail all the politicians, surely why he went into that arena. no competition. obama can actually write them. the difference between hollow and solid. were we better off when nancy's astrologer was running the country than the bushies? probably. can we eat he rich? not enough of them.
so we can only hope that justice roberts has more epileptic fits and moves to the center and scalia offends a mafia don and thomas is in the car with him when the don collects. how else are we going to export bush and cheney to the war crimes trial.
remember beans and corn are a complete protein. useful knowledge in the years ahead as the republicans don't mind waiting while you starve. they already have all your money, currently worthless citizens that we are.
Reagan
Corn has gone wiggi.
Reagan's most noteworthy act (before getting nominated by the Republican party--in 1980) was to publicly call for the use of nuclear weapons to win the war in Vietnam. Should Mr. Obama adopt that position in Iraq, Afghanistan (and Pakistan)?
Reagan ran on a platform which included (as a central theme) balancing the (then) $73-billion budget deficit. Of course, Reganomics ballooned this to $370-billion--then when a balanced budget seemed within reach, he cut taxes on the wealthy.
Most of today's national debt can be traced back, either directly or indirectly to Reaganomics. Specifically, the difference between what we now own and what we now owe roughly equals the lowered capitol gains taxes of the past 2.5 decades (plus accumulated interest payments on same).
Reagan was a great president--if you only had a few years left to live and had no offspring to burden with your debt. For everyone else, he was a voodoo doctor, dressed-up like a stately and wise grandpa.
Respectfully submitted~
Great ideas for writing my
Great ideas for writing my coursework on this topic. Thanks for good info.
custom coursework writing
Can these comments get any
Can these comments get any longer! There are a ton here.
I know for real, these
I know for real, these comments are super long.
increase vertical jump
Can these comments get any
Can these comments get any longer? Dang!
home remedies for acne
