The title is from the regular webpage.
Proposed the Earned Income Tax Credit. He wasn't around to sign it into law, Gerald Ford did that.
Even so; Romney is Nixon’s toupe.
Nixon was for government run health-care.
Good article. I do *somewhat* disagree with this line, though:
“while others have looked to 1980, where a strong conservative defied the oddsmakers’ bets and defeated an incumbent the country perceived as hyper-liberal.”
I think the “hyper-liberal” perception applied more to Carter’s VP Mondale in 1984 than Carter himself in 1980. For most people in 1980, it wasn’t about Carter being seen as a liberal, but being indecisive, ineffective, and pretty much clueless on how to lead or govern. Also, his challenge from within the party came not from the southern/moderate wing (which still existed back then, to some extent), but from Ted Kennedy, the poster child for the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. He wasn’t liberal enough for some in the base.
Nixon did govern to the left of Bill Clinton.
But...Consider the context of the times.
And...Nixon was a very good (better than average) President.
And let’s not forget his legacy.
Rumsfeld, and Cheney.
Raegarding the Court, Nixon put the Minnesota twins on the Court, and one of them, Haryr Blackmun, produced the worst majority opinion since Dred Scot in the case of Roe. v. Wade. Nixon produced almost no conservative outcomes, not even in Viet Nam.
Nixon was a Big Government Republican too.
The Controlled Substance Act.
Tom Wicker, NY Times liberal, wrote this book after Nixon was safely out of office. Wicker's argument that Nixon was a liberal has to be definitive.
Nixon won because George W. Romney was “brainwashed,” and then Nixon put Romney at HUD. Nelson Rockefeller couldn’t make up his mind whether to run and got in too late, as did Ronald W. Reagan. So Nixon was the one that year; the Repubican primary voters continually shoot themselves in the foot. What makes one think 2012 will be any different?
I have no use for the moderate RINO Dick Nixon but enough with this silly meme. Historical revisionism at it's worst. Kennedy was a g-damn liberal slimeball like the rest of his family! I'm the proud grandson of Catholics for Nixon.
I so wish that the SOB had lived long enough to pass all the crap that Johnson eventually did in his stead. We wouldn't see this absurd mythology. If he were still alive today he'd be licking Obama's butt along with his fellow scumbag Jimmuh Carter, singing the praises of his beloved brother's legacy, Obamacare. Attending fundraisers with the partial-birth abortion crowd, ect ect.
Kennedy is the finest example of someone who died before his time getting unjustly glorified.
That's what Phyllis Schlafly said: Nixon capitulated to Rockefeller's wing of the party. It's probably too dramatic. Nixon wasn't so very different from every candidate who moves to the center in the general election. He was running on Eisenhower's record and Eisenhower wasn't a hardliner or ideologue. When you look at where the country was psychologically and what the issues were, that was the obvious and logical strategy.
It reached a point where we can aptly describe the 1960 election as a sort of Seinfeld election: It was an election about nothing.
We've had elections like that in the past. It was a sign of consensus in the country, not necessarily a bad thing. That general harmony and agreement couldn't last. Things were bound to change and politics would inevitably polarize, but compared to what we've been going through lately, that Eisenhower-Kennedy era comity doesn't look so awful.
Nixon and Kennedy agreed on most issues, and Kennedy was actually to the right of Nixon.
Nixon positioned himself to the right of Nixon on missile defense by complaining about a missile gap that didn't exist. And changes in the political landscape made his tax cut policies look conservative, though that shouldn't be taken at face value. But Kennedy was more likely to move left in office than Nixon was because of who Kennedy's advisors were and what Nixon's experience with liberals was.
The problem with this "Romney as Nixon" argument is that it doesn't just apply to Romney alone. Something very similar happened with the Bushes. Something very similar would have happened with Dole or McCain. Something very similar would happen with Gingrich or Perry. Pretty much every president turns out to be a disappointment to the hardliners.
FWIW, I was thinking about Nixon lately, but in terms of Newt Gingrich's campaign. As with Nixon, people are wondering whether there really was a "new Newt," hoping that there is and fearing that there isn't. As with Nixon, there's a limit to how much people can change, especially if their past ways have brought them some success.