Paul Ryan equals John Anderson?

Paul Ryan equals John Anderson?

The link is about a comparison between the GOP candidate in 1980, who ran against Reagan and lost the nomination to Reagan. He then rejected his party's nominee, and ran as an independent against Reagan, and lost again. Paul Ryan has declared that he won't attend the GOP convention in 2024 if Trump wins the nomination. Thus, the comparison. Ryan is the new John Anderson. it would seem. Trump is the new outsider that the GOP Establishment hates.

Which brings me to the disclosure made before on this blog. I didn't vote for Reagan. Instead, I voted for Anderson. It was a protest vote towards Reagan's then proposed massive tax cut. Not that I was against tax cuts, but against tax cuts without the commensurate spending cuts that would keep the budget disciplined. Supposedly, the budget would balance automatically through the process of increased economic growth. Never mind supply side theory, the result was massive deficit spending that has plagued the economy almost every year since. My fears of hyperinflation didn't come true, but the foundation for conditions that would lead to that end were being laid. Hyperinflation may well be in our future now thanks to the defenestration of budgetary responsibility. Former VP Dick Cheney said the lesson of the 80's was that deficits didn't matter. If that's what he learned, then everybody learned the wrong lesson.

The deficit spending is no longer a concern to the public. It isn't even an issue any more. Nobody seems to care about it now. But 70's style inflation is back. Perhaps the concern about excessive spending can once more rise to the level of public debate. But it hasn't thus far.

Perhaps seeing is believing. If the inflation bug continues to plague the economy, maybe now people will believe.

By the way, Anderson positioned himself against Reagan. Former President Gerald Ford said Reagan was too conservative to be elected. Those were examples of opposition to Reagan coming from old Guard GOP. His running mate, George H W. Bush called his boss's economic proposals "voodoo economics". Papa Bush didn't like Reaganism, and tried to govern a "kindler gentler" policy, as if his former boss's policies were somehow too cruel to countenance. It didn't seem to bother him as VP.

But the article didn't not make economic connections. The article linked above made the Washington Establishment connection between Ryan and Anderson. The Establishment didn't like Reagan, who was the outsider in that election. But the outsider won big in 1980 and 1984. George H W Bush rode his coat tails to the Presidency, and it has been downhill for America since. Without Papa Bush in the White House, "Dubya" couldn't have rode the same coat tails to the Presidency in 2000. There is a lesson here. Establishment Republicans don't do very well. They can't win on their own, and have to depend upon some superior force to get them into office. Otherwise, they would always lose.

Now it is DeSantis trying to ride on the populist fervor that Trump brought to the party. But the Establishment GOP isn't about to do anything to earn anybody's loyalty. You have to give it before you can expect it. It seems that their only claim to power is how much they can betray those who they manage to deceive. Trump helped DeSantis, and this is how DeSantis repays him.

George HW Bush deceived the Reagan coalition by breaking his pledge against new taxes. His son rode the tax cuts to the White House, but broke many of his other pledges. Amongst these broken promises were school vouchers, and to veto McCain Feingold election "reform". Betrayal suits the GOP Establishment. That's why they need help to get across the finish line. They cannot be trusted. They play up to enemies as if those enemies will join them. But they don't.

Rejecting Paul Ryan is easy these days. Experience has a way of clarifying things. I've seen their act too many times already. Perhaps the youngsters can learn from history.