Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

In 1982, Unemployment was at 10% but the ruling party did not suffer

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Politics_Guy25 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:38 AM
Original message
In 1982, Unemployment was at 10% but the ruling party did not suffer
I wasn't around in 1982 so I'm curious. What did Ronald Reagan do to escape the political consequences of 10% unemployment? He largely sailed through the unemployment crisis. His re-election never seemed to be in doubt, his political clout was largely unscathed and he really never suffered any serious consequences. I'm sorry but losing 26 seats in a chamber that you already didn't control and just 2 or 3 seats in the senate and retaining majority control is not that high of a price.

What did Reagan do so that unemployment didn't really affect his poll numbers? The P.R. strategy is one that President Obama and the democrats should emulate. I am NOT IN ANY WAY (of course not) suggesting that we follow Reagan's policies nor do I subscribe to the urban legend that he was even a remotely good president but I am suggesting that we follow his p.r. strategy. No one seemed to blame him or his party for 10% unemployment nor care.

What can President Obama do to emulate this teflon? especially since he didn't cause the economic crisis and was elected in large part because of it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. Oops I was wrong
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 12:42 AM by AllentownJake
He did not lose the Senate, he had no gains.

The recession didn't peak till 1983 and calmed down by 1984
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Politics_Guy25 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Not until 1986 and Iran Contra
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 12:46 AM by Politics_Guy25
He retained it in 1982.

Edit: Wow, actually, the dems picked up a whole 1 senate seat in 1982. GOP kept control 54-46. I see no reason why we shouldn't lose just 1 or 2 at most. The situation is entirely similar. Anything different would be totally unfair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Politics_Guy25 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. That's the key then I guess-recession didn't explode until 1983 and then got better for 84
Whereas the recession exploded in the middle of our first year.

At least that explains it to me a little better. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. Dems
gained 27 seats in House. Only 1 in Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:46 AM
Response to Original message
3. Reagan blamed the government for all of the ills that were
impacting the country. Reagan also ignored the beginning of the Aids crises and many lives were lost because of his bigotry.

Here is one of his famous quotes

<snip>
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
<snip>

here are some more of his infamous quotes..


http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Ronald_Reagan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrToast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
5. You are mistaken
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 12:56 AM by DrToast
What did Reagan do so that unemployment didn't really affect his poll numbers?


Ronald Reagan's approval rating was 35% in January of 1983.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating#Historical_comparison
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shotten99 Donating Member (478 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 12:57 AM
Response to Original message
6. Reagan's approval rating was pretty low in his first term.
It wasn't even a "gimme" that he would run. Putting Mondale against him was a sure fire plan to play into the "it was all Carter's fault".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DaveinMD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 01:41 AM
Response to Original message
7. he didn't escape
Democrats gained a bunch of seats in 1982. By 84 the economy was better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ingac70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 02:29 AM
Response to Original message
9. 10.8% unemployment, two years after he was elected.
The old geezer managed to paint it as all Carter's fault, with media help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 02:39 AM
Response to Original message
10. Many of the people who were then 40 & 50-somethings still had guaranteed pensions
already had houses..and many were union.. their kids (Boomers) were just starting families & were not very far along in their careers.. Back then young folks were expected to struggle..to live in crappy apartments, to drive crappy cars.. "Things" were still affordable then tool.. you could afford to take a kid to the doctor, to go to a family restaurant, to take vacations etc.. parents of Boomers often had no elderly parents to care for, and could help their youngsters get a start in life.. ( My mother ..born in 1928, had lost both her parents by 1963)..most people I knew (my age had no living grandparents by age 20...)

Many Boomers lived very happily with foot-lockers for coffeetables, bookcases made from boards & bricks, a card table for a dining room table & hand-me-down furniture scrounged from all over..

Most of us had no credit, and little cash, so qwe just did without until we saved up:)

That's how we did it:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Techn0Girl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 02:44 AM
Response to Original message
11. I was around in '82 ....
Edited on Wed Nov-25-09 02:45 AM by Techn0Girl
And I can tell you that it is WORSE now.
In '82 I was going to college (again) and working as a medical assistant (having just left the military). Work was scarce but NOT as scarce as it is now. I was living in Ohio at the time.

Here is the BIG difference between then and now. At that time I was making about twice the minimum wage - about 7 an hour. On that amount of money you could still afford a decent apartment , enough food and since gas was cheap you could travel to your hearts content. My part time job still came with health care and sick time off. I was also a private pilot back then - even on my meagar salary I could afford to fly twice a month.

I took a Greyhound to LA a couple years after to interview for a job (that I got). My GI bill paid for my college and a $1500 student loan took care of all my books and extra needs. You could afford all of that back then on a very modest wage.

You can't do ANY of that now.

Big difference.
It;s NOT just the lack of jobs - our standard of living is a lot less now.



Try doing that on twice the minimum wage today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burning rain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 03:28 AM
Response to Original message
12. Actually the '82 House losses cost Reagan plenty.
He'd had a working majority in the House his first two years thanks to Republicans plus "Boll Weevil" Democrats. That election put the House back under Tip O'Neill's control for the most part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidpdx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-25-09 04:01 AM
Response to Original message
13. I think the losses in 2010 will be greater then 1982
While Dems may still control the majority, it will be a narrow one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 08:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC