OMNILIBRIUM
  Rational Discussion of Controversial Topics
Economics Education Ethics Foreign Policy Government History Politics Religion Science


Will election of a republican president result in actual right-wing policies?

melian          11 March 2016 09:02 AM


It is commonly assumed that the party affiliation of the next president will have a clear partisan impact on the U.S. domestic and international policies. However, unlike their rhetoric, the actual policies of the U.S. presidents often do not fit the standard left vs. right narrative. For example, despite being a conservative icon, Ronald Reagan became the first president since the WWII to increase government debt to GDP ratio as well as the first president to pass amnesty for illegal immigrants. On the other side, JFK reduced tax rates for the top earners by 20%, sent the U.S. military to Vietnam and during the Caribbean Crisis brought the world close to a nuclear war. More recently, Clinton’s administration cut the welfare program, produced the first balanced the budget since the WWII and authorized invasions of three countries.

With these precedents in mind, is there a strong reason to think that Hillary Clinton’s actual policies would not be to the right of Trump, Rubio or Cruz?



Do you find this topic interesting?
      
-2 -1 0 +1 +2
 

                  Answer                   




Answer category:  All answers Yes No Other
Recommended for You Optimates Populares Centrists

Show comments            Sort by        



FrameBenignly 15 March 2016 11:38 PM
74%

Historically the two parties have not been very consistent on their economic agendas or their foreign policies, but they have been pretty consistent on social issues for the past 50 years. On economic policy, the two parties have been most consistent on health policy and on taxes in terms of relative position. In absolute terms... Barack Obama is to the right of Ronald Reagan on taxes and health care. Modern Republicans are just even further to the right even relative to where they were in 2008 let alone the 1980s. But to get back to the question; Cruz or Rubio, yes; Trump, who knows.


stars0
Reply


VoiceOfRa 15 March 2016 11:41 PM
66%


Barack Obama is to the right of Ronald Reagan on taxes and health care.


So about that time Reagan tried to pass universal healthcare, oh yeah, that didn't happen.


stars0
Reply


FrameBenignly 16 March 2016 10:56 AM
69%

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2014/02/28/the-biggest-government-health-care-spender-since-lbj-was-ronald-reagan/#2ac7aae44d3f

He was opposed to single-payer; there wasn't anything like obamacare's insurance mandate being considered back then. Republicans didn't propose that until the 90s. But he did preside over a large expansion of the health care system just like Obama did. And Obamacare was paid for primarily with spending cuts.

stars0
View Replies (2)
Reply



is4junk 14 March 2016 06:40 AM
66%


sent the U.S. military to Vietnam and during the Caribbean Crisis brought the world close to a nuclear war

authorized invasions of three countries

I guess the definition of right-wing includes warmonger for this post?

As to the actual preposterous question - it takes advantage of a rather flexible definition of right-wing and left-wing. But I think you could fill it out even more.
Lincoln (R): acted against state's rights.
GHWB (R): Raised taxes after swearing he would not.
GWB (R): expanded the welfare state (medicare part D)
Obama (D): Extended the Bush Tax Cuts.


stars0
Reply


melian 14 March 2016 04:06 PM
74%

I guess the definition of right-wing includes warmonger for this post?

Given that there are millions people who either consider themselves right-wing or are considered right-wing by others it is not possible to make them all fit the same definition. There is certainly a very significant faction of Republicans who subscribe to isolationist views and are opposed to all intervention in foreign countries. Likewise, there are many Democrats who were initially very enthusiastic about overthrowing Taliban, Saddam Hussein etc. Still, the labels of “warmongers” for Republicans and “appeasers” for Democrats are not completely without a factual basis. For example, according to a last year poll 81 per cent of Republicans vs 54 per cent of Democrats agreed on using force to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.


stars0
Reply



ChristianKl 14 March 2016 11:33 AM
62%

I think the right/left distinction removes a lot of important information from view.

Will the fact that Trump is a person who sees no problem to forge documents to present in a debate and who thinks he should be able to sue newspapers for writing hit pieces on him, effect the policies of his administration? His administration would likely use the capabilities that the government has via the NSA for political purposes in a way that the other Republican candidates and the Democratic candidates wouldn't.

Topics such as amnesty for illegal immigrants are different. Trump currently proposes a plan that would give most illegal immigrants in the US a legal status that they would receive by leaving the US and then returning. I think there a good chance that more people who are currently in the US illegally would have a legal status under a Trump presidency than under a Clinton presidency.


stars0
Reply


melian 14 March 2016 04:24 PM
73%

I suspect that most Republicans (including those who dislike Trump) do not rank HRC personal integrity significantly above Trump. In any case, it is fear of impeachment rather than personal integrity that usually restrains most presidents from abusing their powers. Popular presidents who have the support of the Senate and of the Supreme Court tend to get a lot more leeway.

stars0
Reply


ChristianKl 17 March 2016 02:53 PM
65%

I suspect that most Republicans (including those who dislike Trump) do not rank HRC personal integrity significantly above Trump.
Focusing on ranking people's personal integrity is a red-herring. There no reason to think one-dimensionally.

Hillary is less likely to use torture than Trump. Whether you call that "personal integrity" is irrelevant to the issue. The same is likely for similar constitutional violations that increase government power.

Apart from that do you think that an administration under Hillary Clinton would be substantially different than the Obama administration?
In any case, it is fear of impeachment rather than personal integrity that usually restrains most presidents from abusing their powers.
What makes you think that the threat of impeachement is a significant factor in motivating politicians? ... read more


stars0
View Replies (2)
Reply


VoiceOfRa 20 March 2016 11:47 AM
65%


who thinks he should be able to sue newspapers for writing hit pieces on him,


And this differs from Hillary, how?


stars0
Reply


ChristianKl 22 March 2016 05:23 AM
63%

Hillary doesn't argue that new laws should be passed for that purpose and Citizens United wasn't a newspaper.

stars0
View Replies (3)
Reply