America lived through a Trump-like presidency before, with lasting consequences

[corbe]

America lived through a Trump-like presidency before, with lasting consequences

By Dane Strother, opinion contributor — 02/24/19 01:00 PM EST   

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill, TBR or corbe
 
The old adage that one is doomed to repeat history if ignorant of it should be a current siren call for Democrats. America lived through a Trump-like presidency almost 200 years ago with Andrew Jackson, and Jackson’s ideology outlived his presidency by some 20 years. Donald Trump’s could, too, if history repeats itself.

One grew up an orphan and impoverished; the other was gifted with generational wealth by his father. One became a war hero, and the other dodged service. Yet America’s seventh president, Jackson, approached governing in a manner that mirrors Trump’s in many ways.

Jackson ran for president against a former president’s son, the political establishment and corporate elites, and won by making himself a champion of the common man. He lost his first race against John Quincy Adams when he received the most Electoral College votes, but not a majority of the Electoral College vote, which kicked the election to the Congress, who selected Adams. Jackson dubbed it a “stolen election” and coined the phrase “The Corrupt Bargain.” He spent the following four years claiming he was robbed, and voters ultimately joined him in anger. 

He began his second campaign solidifying his political base in the South and rural areas by throwing gasoline on the fire of their resentment and belief that East Coast elites were living off the taxes and labor of hard-working, decent, regular folks.

<..snip..>

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/430927-america-lived-through-a-trump-like-presidency-before-with-lasting

[dfwgator]

Obama's Presidency is going to have a lot more "consequences" than Trump's ultimately.

[Wingnut]

Andrew Jackson?  Horse hockey. 

He began his second campaign solidifying his political base in the South and rural areas by throwing gasoline on the fire of their resentment and belief that East Coast elites were living off the taxes and labor of hard-working, decent, regular folks. 

That today describes the modern day Democrat candidate and party as a whole.  So the premise of his tripe is faulty.

[Bill Cipher]

Obama's Presidency is going to have a lot more "consequences" than Trump's ultimately.

Glad to see we can agree that Trump is an inconsequential President.

[roamer_1]

Obama's Presidency is going to have a lot more "consequences" than Trump's ultimately.

That remains to be seen... If Tump gets a second swing at it, his second term may very well be much different than his first when, like Bush, he can forget about his base. There is no telling where he will go in that case.

[Cyber Liberty]

That remains to be seen... If Tump gets a second swing at it, his second term may very well be much different than his first when, like Bush, he can forget about his base. There is no telling where he will go in that case.

I always thought guaranteeing a President's status as a Lame Duck from the first day of his second term would have a lot of bad consequences.  Both Reagan's and Bush's second terms were for crap.

[roamer_1]

I always thought guaranteeing a President's status as a Lame Duck from the first day of his second term would have a lot of bad consequences.  Both Reagan's and Bush's second terms were for crap.

That's right. There is an urge to secure a legacy, and that may not look at all like campaign promises.

[Bigun]

I always thought that the Constitution was the rule book for the fed. gov.  but it turns out I was wrong about that, at least during my now 8th decade here.

[Right_in_Virginia]

That's right. There is an urge to secure a legacy, and that may not look at all like campaign promises.

And then again, it's very likely that the legacy for a first time politician who wins the White House is fulfillment of his campaign promises.  Very likely.

[roamer_1]

And then again, it's very likely that the legacy for a first time politician who wins the White House is fulfillment of his campaign promises.  Very likely.

There is nothing to indicate that at all.
There is however, very much to prove a president's second term is nothing like his campaign promises as he reverts to form - There is no profit in 'the base' anymore.