Reagan vs Romney
Today I was presented with this analysis. What do you think?
"Romney had an 85% democratic legislature to deal with. That's a veto-proof majority. Despite that, Romney was able to get them to cut spending, lower taxes, and opt for his slightly better option of health care reform than their plan, which was a single payer government-controls-it-all health system. MA even got a credit rating upgrade after Romney convinced the dems to take concrete steps and turn a deficit (about $3 billion I think) into a surplus (of almost $1 or so). The best you can get out of a deep, deep blue state like that is Scott Brown and Mitt Romney. They can not get elected if they run the way you and I may want them to run. To use a phrase I made when backing Romney in '08, McCain was a liberal as Red Arizona would tolerate, and Romney was as conservative as Blue Massachusetts would let him get away with.
Reagan had to deal with a similar situation, and signed a bill legalizing abortion, created no-fault divorce in CA, enacted the highest tax increase in CA history, and doubled the state budget in just eight years. Reagan even agreed to raise taxes AS PRESIDENT, something that won't happen these days under our watch (there was no ATR pledge back then). In fact, Reagan only raised taxes once since he was double crossed as we always are on these things.
Candidate Reagan in 1980 Candidate Romney in 2012
Raised Taxes Cut Taxes
Legalized abortion, then flipped to pro-life Flipped to pro-life
Increased government spending Cut government spending
Now Romney was in a much bluer state than Reagan - remember that CA went GOP until 1992...
So for me Romney is good to go. Plus, like Reagan, he will bring lots of real conservatives into the government. Lower level folks who have been fighting the dems since 1995, and know what needs to be done and how to do it. "
Views: 61
© 2013 Created by Lisa Miller.
