The Reagan Factor—Why Obama Will Win

To understand what Ronald Reagan did for this country, and a bit about how he did it, all you have to do is read a few telling quotes by and about him.

Whenever you watched and listened to President Reagan, you had the feeling that this is not just a great country, but a good one. It was “Morning in America,” and ours was “a shining city on a hill,” the hope and envy of the world.

Republicans and conservatives have been looking high and low for “another Reagan,” and in my opinion, have found one. His name is Barack Obama. (If you’d like, you can add, “dammit.”)

The right risks losing the White House in a landslide if it keeps “misunderestimating” Senator Obama. He is, like Reagan, a master of the rhetoric of hope and optimism. After seven years of the worst leadership in a century, the time is ripe for such a leader, just as it was after four years of Jimmy Carter’s weakness and malaise, or before that, five years of Nixon’s paranoia and criminality. When times are darkest, we are most drawn to the light.

In addition to that optimism, both Reagan and Obama match(ed) rhetoric with demeanor. The resemblance is hard to miss: a ready smile, a confident carriage, a sense of humor, a calm generosity towards the opposition, a face that beams with vitality and benevolence, an undeniable charisma.

But these are matters of style that only resonate through time if backed by substance. Reagan was a relentless Cold Warrior who was steeped in the principles of conservatism. Today, his style is secondary to the substance that helped him reshape the world. Along with Pope John Paul II and Margaret Thatcher, Reagan’s staunch defiance of the Soviets opened a new era in the West.

It remains to be seen whether Obama’s legacy will approach, much less match or exceed, Reagan’s, and I’m not about to make any predictions of that magnitude (though three weeks ago I predicted an Obama landslide in November.)

When Obama invoked Ronald Reagan in January, it set off a firestorm among Reagan-hating liberals and Reagan-worshipping Republicans alike. The former saw it as traitorous, a sellout, a cheap campaign stunt; the latter, as an infringement on something almost sacred. Keen political observers saw a masterful politician appealing to moderates and Reagan Democrats (and to some disaffected conservatives, like Melvyn Krauss of the conservative Hoover Institute, as well.)

Obama doesn’t appear to be just another quasi-socialist class-warrior like John Edwards. His health care plan, for example, is based in the free market; it’s not a single-payer, universal system, as I pointed out to Neal Boortz on his radio show this morning. (For two excellent critiques of Obama’s plan, see OnTheIssues.org and HealthCentral.com.)

Like it or not, Americans vote with their hearts, not their minds (this is especially true of liberals.) If intellect and experience trumped image and emotion, Richard Nixon would have defeated John Kennedy handily. If integrity and experience trumped image and emotion, Bob Dole would have done the same to Bill Clinton. On paper, Gerald Ford was a better candidate than Jimmy Carter, and John McCain is a better candidate than Obama.

In the American bloodstream, however, a candidate who convincingly promises better times and the renewal of hope and pride is hard to beat. Add a dash of charisma, and you have the potential for a landslide, just like we saw in 1980.

Reagan rose to power at just the right historical moment. Obama has a similar opportunity to make history. He offers, quite literally, a new face to show a world weary of George Bush’s reckless and unilateral foreign policy. He offers a new face to show that America has overcome racial prejudice and elected a nonwhite president.

Republicans have been looking for another Reagan, and they’ve found one—on the other side of the aisle.

Newsprism