The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (7 comments)


    Hillary is full of shit. Regan was a great president! He doesn’t like big government and cut taxes. She is so delusional.

  2. Median household income stats, one of the best and most objective gauges of national prosperity, grew strongly under both Reagan and Clinton, suggesting both Reaganomics and Clintonomics were successful. In great contrast, MHI is actually lower now than when Obama took office. Hillary should separate herself from Barack, and talk up both the Gipper and Bill. The American people are ready to get back to work.

  3. James. You and the Republicans are never going to win with intellectual arguments – on any issue, in any race. The voters you need to come to our side, just don’t have the attention span to read and understand your articles.

    Every republican candidate needs a bumper-sticker campaign – a bumper sticker for every issue.

    I know it’s a challenge. But, it’s also a BIG opportunity for the party leadership. Here’s what I mean:

    Have the Republican candidates get all their constituents involved in coming up with a bumper sticker for each issue. Don’t give the task to the campaign staffs. You only get a few ideas that way. Show you have faith in the people. You’ll get tens of thousands of ideas.

    Offer a substantial financial reward for each winning idea. You might want to offer a prize for winning entries that work in Spanish as well as in English.

    With this approach, you’ll not only get better bumper stickers, you’ll be demonstrating something much more important. You’ll be showing the Republican Party is the party of the people. You’ll be actually demonstrating that it is the Republicans who believe in the power and creativity of the people. You’ll be demonstrating that the Republican candidate believes in financially rewarding creativity as opposed to government handouts the dems advocate.

    “Rewards for bumper stickers” is just a simple example. There are many more things you can do, once you get this basic idea – that there still is power in the people. You don’t have to depend on the political elites to solve problems. Virtually every problem we face can be solved by the people.

    Think about it

  4. juandos

    You and the Republicans are never going to win with intellectual arguments – on any issue, in any race“…

    Well rjb I do belive you’re making a valid point…

    Hey Jimmy P, consider the Roger Williams approach

  5. Hillary Clinton overstates the differences, and Obama understates them. Clinton’s GDP and GDP/capita growth rates roughly matched Reagan’s if we start the clock after the severe recession engineered by Reagan and Volcker to tame inflation and we focus on the subsequent recovery period. Neither era came close what was achieved by JFK/LBJ, but both were somewhat better than the Ike years and the 1970s, and both were much better than the two Bush eras (and Obama years to date). Clinton did better than Reagan on some other measures, like balancing the budget rather than greatly increasing deficits, while raising the real minimum wage and achieving full employment. That said, Clinton mostly tweaked Reaganomics (featuring, depending on your political leanings, “supply side” or “trickle down”) in ways that proved superior to those of either Bush presidents.

  6. juandos

    Neither era came close what was achieved by JFK/LBJ“…

    Yes pjr we can thank LBJ and those that supported his so call war on poverty: The War on Poverty: $15 Trillion and Nothing to Show for It

  7. Morgan Michaels


    No one has ever been tricked into being rational.

    If your goal is only to manipulate irrational voters by appeals to emotion, you are playing right into the Democrat/’Progressive’ wheelhouse. They will always be better at making emotionalistic arguments. Fundamentally ‘Progressives’ live in a world in which reason is futile anyway.

    Anyone capable of manipulating the voters to reject the disingenuous machinations of the ‘Progressives’ by demonstrating an even more unprincipled and insidious engineering of public sympathies is ethically unfit to wield such power. We already have an amoral ruling class populated by high-functioning anti-social personalities, we don’t need another.

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:


Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Refine Content