View Full Version : Romney: An Eisenhower Republican?

05-07-2012, 03:17 PM
Now, I am not comparing Romney to Eisenhower in terms of bravery, morals, valor or any of that. I don't believe Romney is a very moral man (he reminds me of a used cars salesman, as opposed to Obama being just an incompetent), I do not believe he is all that brave or valorous. So, I am not comparing him to President Eisenhower as a whole.

However, ideologically, does anyone else agree that Romney is sort of an older kind of Republican--a moderate who is not a Socialist or Communist, and is simply Conservative LEANING, rather than all out Conservative? I'm talking about the kind of Republican that Taft was, Eisenhower was, that Nixon was, on the Democratic side, that Truman and JFK were. All generally good policy wise who simply walked along the balance, who adhered to the center, and appealed to many on both sides of the isle. I see him as sort of that old fashioned mold of a political canididate. A true moderate. I mean it is hard to say with Romney, given his "flip flops" but that is the kind of person I think he is--an Eisenhower, JFK, Truman or Nixon politically--Not an extremist for either side.

I think our country needs that. We need to have a consensus again. In the post WWII era until the late 1960s or so, we had what they called the "Post War Consensus". People disagreed politically, but they didn't hate each other. Liberals and Conservatives disagreed, but generally were in agreement on key issues like defense, border security, etc. And I worry that the current level of bitterness both sides feel toward each other could come to harm or poison our country, and thus I feel a leader who appeals to BOTH sides might help. Obama, policies, aside, doesn't. He is a guy you either love, or you hate, with only a small few feeling truly neutral or indifferent on him. Whereas in 1956, most of America "liked Ike"; in 1972, most of America voted for Nixon, etc.

05-07-2012, 03:35 PM
We did very well under Eisenhower.

05-07-2012, 04:00 PM
I disagree with certain premises here. Nothing against Ike but I think of Romney more as a Rockefeller republican.

And I dont think the country needs more "consensus" (by the lefts definition) as currently practiced. I think we need a strong conservative leader who can articulate our values to the public. We need to convince the "other side" and the "middle" that we are right and the left is wrong. The democrat party has been hijacked by the fringe kook left. We dont need to "coddle" them. They (and their allies in the media) must be defeated. There are just too many things I could say along these lines to give some perspective and some background but I just dont have the time right now.

Anyways Reagan didnt throw his values aside to win the landslides that he won on the one hand. On the other hand it took him 3 tries before he "got it". This is a war of ideas and it will never go away. As Burke said "The only thing necessary for evil to win, is for good men to do nothing". The natural order of things is for Liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

We have way too many voters who shouldnt be voting and way too many people sitting on the sidelines doing nothing aside from being spectators. While the MSMedia (so called "reporters") is acting like nothing more than stenographers for the hard left. Meanwhile our kids have been attending these leftist indoctrination centers under cover as "education" for far too many generations now. Its a deadly combination of things and events. No wonder so many of them now lack the critical thinking skills necessary in this environment. Most of them now go with a "herd" like mentality. Thus we have "sheeple" waiting for the next "pied piper".

We need a leader. Which is far rarer. Not another mushy "middle of the roader" which is "cheaper by the dozen" imho.

05-07-2012, 09:02 PM
Maybe Romney doesn't fit with any previous president, or it's hard to know until we see how he leads. He scares me a little because I don't fully trust him at this point. I KNOW he'd be better than Obama.

not to high jack the thread but...

Janice I know your points about education are true, and something has been bothering me for awhile now. My youngest child is about to graduate high school this month (yay) and she's a pretty strong conservative. She and her siblings all went to public school, with a 2 year hiatus at a Christian school. Both of my daughters are conservative and my son the soldier :) is more moderate, but leans conservative.

I think that you're basically right, that schools are churning out little liberals, but does it also show parental apathy? I mean, I seem to have been able to get the conservative ideals across in spite of public school and supposedly the country is 50/50 conserv/lib.

College of course is different because the "kids" are much more into being independent from parents and are trying out their wings, but my older daughter has done 3 years of college and is still intact. We remember the adage "if you're not a liberal when you're young you have no heart and if you're not a conservative when you're old you have no brain."

Sorry about that ASquareDealer!

05-07-2012, 09:18 PM
We did very well under Eisenhower.

Truman balanced the budget several times, Eisenhower balanced it I believe three times in a row. FY 1969 was a balanced budget, but I believe LBJ was responsible (as the outgoing President) for FY 1969. I read somewhere that the outgoing President is responsible for submitting the budget for the year he leaves office (IE, FY 1961 would've been an Ike budget; FY 1993 would've been a Bush I budget, etc). Nixon, I believe, was on target for a balanced budget in 1975 and might've achieved it if not for Watergate. Taft was a good middle of the road guy who respected the law while being a very moderate President.

Say what you will about any of the past Presidents, and even people like Nelson Rockefeller, but none of them bowed to a foreign leader. Most here probably dislike FDR, but at least he wasn't weak when it came to our enemies; He was calling Hitler and the Nazis thugs as early as 1937. And no President before Clinton, even the most Liberal, ever pushed the extreme left multiculturalism/anti-Western society/anti traditionalist crap. I can't imagine FDR or LBJ in their most liberal moments ever pushing for gays in the military, or being pro-abortion. All of our Presidents until now at least were firm Christians and truly seemed to love the country. I mean FDR led the nation in prayer for our troops storming Normandy. What President now would have the guts, in this multicultularist society, to lead soldiers onward in a Christian prayer and ask the nation to ask God's help in attaining victory? The media would tear a President who did that apart as being a "fundy."

05-08-2012, 09:26 AM
I'll take an Eisenhower Republican over a Stalinist Democrat any day.