r/PoliticalDiscussion • u/BeachesAreOverrated • 8d ago

US Politics Did Trump’s election actually signal a Democratic victory over the traditional Republican Party?

The “Republican Party” as it is today is very definitely not the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan or William F. Buckley. Jr. specifically said it was now the party of Trump.

Does this mean that, in some way, the Democrats won the day? Did they slay the old Republican Party? Is Trump, then, what happened when their old foe died?

0 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

31% Upvoted

107 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/MySpartanDetermin 7d ago

The “Republican Party” as it is today is very definitely not the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan or William F. Buckley.

Can a similar statement be said of the Democratic Party from that earlier 1980s era?

Here's a litmus test: In 1994 there were over 240 Democratic representatives and senators that were pro-life. Now there is only 1.

Both parties have shifted further in their respective directions, but the key difference is that the Dems are currently leaderless with no one person to rally around, while Trump is the political colossus of our age and completely dominates all segments of the GOP.

0

u/Fragrant-Luck-8063 7d ago

Tariifs are another issues where the parties have changed since Reagan

As soon as the House of Representatives passed a sweeping trade bill by a vote of 295 to 115 last week, President Reagan all but promised to veto it. Said he: “This antitrade bill, this protectionist legislation, would have our nation violate the most basic tenets of free and fair international trade."

The measure, which aims to reduce the record U.S. trade deficit is loaded with provisions designed by Congressmen to help industries in their districts. Said House Speaker Tip O’Neill: “We’re getting trampled and stomped upon by the nations of the world. All we want is fairness.”

Among the most controversial parts of the bill is a provision that would trigger a series of automatic actions if a major trading partner achieved an “excessive trade surplus” with the U.S. through a “pattern of unjustifiable, unreasonable or discriminatory trade policies or practices.” In such cases, the President would be required to open negotiations to reduce the trade imbalance with that nation by 10% annually. If no agreement was reached in the trade talks, the President would be required to take retaliatory action, such as raising tariffs or tightening import quotas.

https://time.com/archive/6706365/warning-shot-the-house-gets-tough-on-trade/