Skip to comments.Dick Morris: How Second Terms Fail
Posted on 01/19/2005 2:14:35 PM PST by RWR8189
PRESIDENTIAL second terms usually end in fail ure. Since 1900, only Teddy Roosevelt could boast of a second term that was as good or better than his first. Woodrow Wilson lost Congress, then couldn't bring America into the League of Nations. FDR, whose third term was a success, failed to pass anything in his second after he alienated Congress by trying to pack the Supreme Court and purge recalcitrant Democrats. Harry Truman's popularity plunged over Korea, as Lyndon Johnson's did over Vietnam. Ike had two recessions and a hospitalization. Richard Nixon resigned. Ronald Reagan had Iran-Contra, and Bill Clinton was impeached.
The reasons for second-term failure are pretty much the same: Presidents generally do what they are good at in their first four years, then spend their second term responding to the agendas imposed upon them by events. Plus, re-election itself tends to encourage a spirit of hubris even as top staff typically depart in search of lucrative jobs, leaving second stringers in charge.
But President Bush has gotten off to a very good start in the weeks since Election Day. Palestine is lurching toward peace. North Korea seems likely to return to six-power talks. Iraq will hold an election, with turnout likely exceeding our own. Ukraine has opted for democracy. And the tsunami has kindled a global spirit of cooperation and unity unlike anything since 9/11.
But Bush has clearly signaled that he will not devote the next four years as he has the past three exclusively to fighting the War on Terror. While not planning to let up the pressure on our enemies, he plans to tackle the two most difficult tasks in American politics: Social Security and income-tax reform. Only Reagan succeeded in the latter; nobody has ever done both.
President Bush's hope of
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
To call Reagan's second term a failure is ridiculous. He had problems with Iran Contra but probably could have been reelected in 88 (as might Clinton have been in 2000)
I'm pretty confident that Bush will have a successful 2nd term as long as he stays to the right.
John Gibson on Fox - just asked Geraldine Ferraro if the Democrats were going to act like Barbara Boxer or Diane Feinstein. She just keeps repeating that the Dems have to elect a Chair of the DNC and get more Dems elected.
So they have no intention of working with President Bush for the next 4 years. They are only dedicated to getting back political power.
No ideas, no new solutions - same ol' same ol' what a shame for the USA.
Ike, Nixon, and the Gipper didn't have conservative talk radio, Fox News, and (most important) Free Republic along with the rest of the Internet. But Clinton did (hehehehehe).
Neither party EVER has any intention of "working with" the other party. The only people who don't know this are the Washington press corps.
I'd say Reagan's term was a failure. He retreated on taxes, Iran-Contra, and basically slept through the term. I love the guy but the truth is his second term was largely a failure.
OH NO! You mean we're going have to get things done without their help???? Gosh its like repeating the LAST 4 years!
Morris needs a fix. Anybody got some toes?
Sounds like a success.
Complaining about clinton again?!?
I forget....did Morris fail in Clinton's first term, or his second?
Ronald Reagan had Iran-ContraTo sum up Reagan's second term with these words is a very stupid thing to do.
With all due respect, in his second term he passed the major tax reform bill that resulted in fewer tax brackets in return for eliminating most tax shelters. That was the closest we came to a flat tax. Also, he gave the "tear down that wall" speech. I just don't see the failure.
I'm with you on this - I just don't think it's reasonable to expect a president to go full flank ahead reforming the country for eight straight years. Political battles take time and energy, and eight years of them has got to be a lot to take.
That's pretty clear. The tear down the wall speech was great, but it wasn't a magic summons. The tax situation isn't as you say, though, and rather than get into a big debate over it I'll just let you believe as you do. Iran Contra, deficits, bloated government and more contradict that view, though.
Yeah, but you have to accomplish something to be a good President in both terms. The second term, as I recall, he put in a tax 'compromise' that was really a tax increase.
I like Reagan, too, but I don't remember his second term being really productive for conservatives. Certainly not like the first two years were.
Dick Morris: How self-obsessed pundits get overblown in the media.
"[regarding social security] the answer is to link retirement age to life expectancy."
Not a bad idea at all. Except life expectancy is mutable and would change every year, and life expectancy is set by factors that probably would be difficult for government to prevent people and legislators from gaming.
Thanks a lot. I cannot resist opening a post with Dick opinining; then I hate myself and have to wash my computer - with bleach.
Good old Dick Morris.
He always presents his ideas with enthusiasm, no matter how far fetched they are.
Bush will not get away with forcing a single solution over a multi generational problem with social security.
But if he will open his ears, he has a chance to put a solution in place.
The question is, will he listen??
If his tax solution does not include getting rid of the IRS, then what does he solve?
He has a chance to fail in a spectacular way. Or to succeed in a way that is responsive to the people. It is one heck of a test.
Okay, I see Dick got his toe fix....BUT Dick's back is facing away from the female and the female's toes are facing away from Dick.
Did he twist her foot off?
Well the Morris prediction cinches it, W is going to have a Successful Second Term.
Dick Morris is dumb. And like his former boss who'm he turned traitor on when .... well you know that story. Anyway like his former boss he gets his views from whichever way the winds blowing today. Tomorrow he'll be declaring just the opposite.
When you get him and Orielly together its positive painful to watch.
I don't think the 86 tax law was an increase. It resulted in two brackets and elimination of lots of deductions. He did agree to an increase in 82 which we should be angry about but the 86 tax law was a good one.
It was during Reagan's second term that he met Gorbachev at Reykjavik and refused to compromise on SDI. I remember the drubbing he took from the libs at the time - all they could talk about was how he had "squandered" the potential for weapons reduction. Reagan was right in holding his ground. Forcing the Soviets to respond to the prospect of a functional and deployed SDI system helped tumble the Communist regime, IMO.
Wasn't social security overhauled in 1988 which extended its projected viability to the numbers quoted today?
Morris got a toe stuck up his nose....
Reagan's second term a "failure"?
Mr. Doom and gloom looking to pick up a few bucks and call attention to himself?
I have NO clue on WHY anyone listens to the "toe sucker".
Reagan's second term gave us the 1986 tax increase; the largest ever up to that point.
Perhaps you forgot Rejkavik, which caused international communism to topple.
The 86 tax hike killed the US economy.
"Yep, we're real productive out there in the rat-race after 65. Not to mention that the corporate world figures that once you get 30 yrs in with the company and are over 55, they just push you out the door (unless you have achieved upper management). Not everybody gets treated like Dan Rather."
I would love to see statistics that back that up. In fact, most income earners make their biggest incomes after 50.
"Quite a few Pubs will be retiring from Congress themselves if they jump on raising the age."
Yeah, right. /sarcasm Who's gonna make them pay, already retired seniors? It's not like Congress has never raised the age before, and gosh, whoever did that was voted out of office immediately. NOT.
I would prefer we cash out the program entirely. It's theft. But the obvious way to solve the problem of perception that in cutting Social Security you're starving retirees is to cut the number of retirees that do rely on it. Hell, I wish they'd raise the age to 100. Then people who can never rely on it will be pissed the tax is so high and do something about it.
LoL.. Exactly right.. The pot looking at the kettle and saying ...DOH!..
Maybe SDI was worth keeping, but I can balance that with the START signoff of middle-range nukes. We should have made them maintain ALL those arms stocks. It'd have been an even faster collapse.
C A C A (CACA)
Complaining about clinton again
I'm going to steal the CACA thing. ;)
No it did hurt the commercial real estate market which was hooked on tax breaks but if you believe in limited government you cannot prop up every government supported entity.
The stock market crashed after the 87 tax hike, That hurt everyone not just the special interests.
The stock market crash was a result of many things, not the least of which was James Baker talking the dollar down as a means to a trade war with Germany. The tax reform of 1986 was not a tax hike.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.