Is History Repeating Itself?

When Richard Nixon decided to run for president in 1968, many observers regarded this as quixotic quest.  Nixon had lost to Kennedy in 1960 and been soundly defeated in his bid for the governorship in California two years later.  The cognoscenti therefore concluded that he had been thoroughly discredited and could not possibly win.

Liberals never liked Nixon.  They despised him as the man who had taken down Alger Hiss.  For them, he was the personification of mean spirited conservatism.  Moreover with his five o’clock shadow, he looked the part.  Hence, when, after his California loss, he declared that the press would not have him to kick around anymore, they hoped it was true.

But surprise, surprise; Nixon won in 68.  Indeed, he defeated a sitting vice-president who had been the darling of progressives.  There was no way he should have beaten Hubert Humphrey.  The question was, why?  How could so many Americans have voted for so unlikable a man?

 Part of the answer has to be the turbulent 60’s.   The nation had recently endured a series of shocks.  There had been assassinations, an anti-war movement, and racial violence.  Several inner cities had been burned to the ground and radicals threatened to bomb innocent civilians.

As a result, Nixon was able to mobilize the silent majority.  Millions of voters were tired of seeing their nation assaulted.  They wanted a return to normal.  As the law and order candidate, this is what Nixon promised.

Are we today seeing a reprise of this scenario?  Will the current violence on our streets produce a similar backlash?  Will rioters protesting police malfeasance by looting targets of opportunity arouse sufficient disgust?  Do terrorist bombers frighten people as much as the Weathermen once did?

Times are not quite the same.  The social chaos has not yet reached the same proportions.  Nor is the electorate identical.  There are now many more minority voters.  As for Donald Trump, he is no Nixon.  Although comparably distrusted, he is not nearly as politically well versed.

Political pundits see the parallels.  But they also see the disjunctions.  Consequently few are willing to hazard a prediction—particularly with the polls as close as they have been.

But then there is the Reagan precedent.  When he ran for the presidency in 1980, the nation was also in turmoil.  The economy had gone south and Iran was holding hostages.  These events made the United States look weak and indecisive.  People wanted their confidence resorted.  Reagan promised as much.

But like Nixon, Reagan was a flawed candidate.  He was a movie star; a Wild West cowboy.  How could a man who threatened to defy the Russians be trusted?  Just as importantly, how could someone so reactionary be assigned to protect our economy?

We know how this came out.  Not only was Reagan elected, but he brought the Carter inflation under control.  Then he did something of historic proportions.  He faced down the Soviets and won.  Although most experts expected the cold war to drag on indefinitely, he laid the foundation for its termination.

Trump too is facing economic malaise and international disorder.  He too must deal with retrenchment and pessimism.  Unlike Reagan, however, he is not a student of government.  He does not have a well-formed philosophy about how to solve our problems.

No, Trump is a businessman and a braggart.  Moreover, his rhetoric is often so inflated that not even his most zealous supporters expect him to be able to keep every promise.  Although he was a successful builder and TV personality will that translate into political success?

No one can be sure.  Probably the best thing Trump has going for him is Hillary Clinton.  She is so closely associated with the current ills and so personally disreputable, the millions of American hesitate to put her in charge.

Will this be enough to put Trump over the top?  Will enough voters take a chance that he can restore our nation’s equilibrium?  While I have decided to back this dark horse, I am holding my breath and hoping for the best.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University