Pinkerton: Biden is guiding Truman and Clinton to win in 2024
The Democratic president, a former frontier state senator, was snubbed in the polls and not very popular.
He made many mistakes in the Oval Office, and yet his aides knew one important thing: if they stayed on the right side of the key issue—a guaranteed income for Americans—and could portray the Republicans as wrong sides of this issue, they would be fine. In fact, the Republicans who took power on Capitol Hill chose to follow unpopular ideological agendas. They played into the hands of the Democrats.
So the incumbent got to work: he criticized the Republicans for implementing exotic schemes that would endanger the well-being of Americans, especially the elderly.
Does this sound a bit like Joe Biden when he criticized Republicans in his address to the US Congress for wanting to cut or even reform Social Security and Medicare? How did his people publish a newsletter on this subject? How did he even go to Florida to further push the idea? While the mainstream media played along with enthusiastic headlines like “Democrats would like to hold a human rights election in 2024”?
President Joe Biden delivers an address to the US Congress on February 7, 2023. (AFP)
Well, if that sounds like Biden, it’s a little scary, because I was actually describing Harry Truman, the 33rd president, who won a major presidential victory in 1948.
Truman had previously been a frontier state senator—Missouri, like Delaware, was a slave state that remained in the Union during the Civil War—and not well respected, having only become president after the death of his predecessor. , Franklin D. Roosevelt.
However, Truman had every intention of becoming president in his own right, and to help him, aides Clark Clifford and James Roe drafted a 43-page memorandum in November 1947 outlining a clever strategy for their man. Clifford and Rowe recognized that the likely Republican presidential nominee in 1948, New York Republican Governor Thomas E. Dewey, was a moderate centrist. In other words, Dewey might seem plausible to voters who were looking for safe change after a decade and a half of Democratic dominance. Therefore, aides Clifford and Rowe advised targeting the Republicans instead. Congress. The Republican Party on Capitol Hill was far to the right of Dewey and therefore, Truman’s supporters reasoned, could be portrayed as extremist and dangerous. Thus, despite the fact that Dewey’s name will be on the ballot opposite Truman, the Democrats, in fact, decided to run against the Republicans in Congress.
The key issue for the Democrats was Social Security, Roosevelt’s signature New Deal program. As the Democrats wrote in their party platform on July 12, 1948:
We advocate expanding the Democratic-led welfare program to provide additional protection against the dangers of old age, disability, disease, or death.
Three days later, in his Philadelphia convention acceptance speech, Truman “wrote Republicans hell,” including on welfare issues:
Again and again, I have recommended changes to the Social Security Act, including extending protection to those currently not covered and increasing benefits.
Truman ridiculed Republicans for promising to “keep the elderly safe” (in previous elections they had learned the hard way not to claim the program was “unworkable”); Truman growled that when he made the recommendation to expand the program:
Congress studied this issue for 2 years, but did not find time to extend or increase benefits. But they took the time to take away 750,000 people’s welfare benefits, and they overrode my veto.
He poked the Republican Party, “I wonder if they think they can fool the people of the United States with such nonsense!”
Thanks to such sharp, contrasting rhetoric, Truman won the 1948 election by a comfortable margin of 4.5 points. And this despite the fact that the candidates from the third and fourth parties, both renegade Democrats, scored 4.7 percent of the vote. In other words, their voices came out from under Truman’s skin. If it had been a two-man race in 1948, Truman vs. Dewey, the Missouri would have won by a landslide.
President Harry S. Truman gleefully displays the premature early release of the Chicago Daily Tribune from his train in St. Louis, Missouri following the defeat of Thomas E. Dewey in the 1948 presidential election. (Frank Cancellare/UPI via Getty Images)
Yet Truman the man was not overwhelming. However, Truman defender of the New Deal was a grinder. All Truman had to do was clear the choice to the voters. New Deal vs. Anti-New Dealand he would have won. And that’s what he did. Indeed, further evidence that Truman was on a big blue wave of sentiment was found in the congressional elections that year: the Democrats won nine seats in the Senate and 75 seats in the House of Representatives.
So that was 1948, a long time ago. But other observers have noticed that Bill Clinton capitalized on the same dynamic – positioning himself as a campaigner for rights, while at the same time criticizing the Republicans as heartless state employees – in the 1996 presidential election, which, of course, Clinton won.
But Truman’s victory was the first, and it was, including Congress, much more sweeping. For their part, Republicans unwilling to lose in 2024 should examine what went wrong for the GOP in 2024. both 1948 or 1996.
Bill Clinton waves to supporters flanked by his wife Hillary Clinton and running mate Al Gore after Clinton won the 1996 presidential election on November 5, 1996. (Brooks Kraft LLC/Sygma via Getty Images)
Let’s face it, folks: Social Security is popular. These days, according to a 2022 Data for Progress poll, 68 percent of Americans oppose privatization of the program. Moreover, 83 percent of Americans support increase Social security benefits. And the numbers for Medicare aren’t much different. Interestingly, Donald Trump clearly agrees with Biden. As early as January 20, the 45th president said, “Republicans should not, under any circumstances, vote to cut a single cent from Medicare or Social Security.” (Old-age pensions are also popular in other countries; people think they deserve them, which is why nearly a million French citizens also took to the streets to protest pension cuts this weekend.)
Yet, as Bidenists are keen to point out, Republicans seem to have an odd fascination with cutting and/or privatizing social security. You know how moths are fascinated by flames. On Feb. 6, House Budget Committee Chairman Jody Arrington (R-Tx), joined by many other House Republicans, called for a “fast track” deficit committee that would review all federal spending. Minutes later, Biden’s press aide dismissed the commission’s idea as a “death commission.” As we remember, the “panel of death” label is, well, the kiss of death for a supporter.
And speaking of the kiss of death, this is what Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) passed on to his GOP colleague, Senator Rick Scott (R-Fla). Asked about Scott’s past proposal to “shut down” (revise) the entitlement programs that Scott himself repudiated but that Democrats gleefully recalled, McConnell replied, “It’s just a bad idea. I think it will be difficult for him to deal with this during his re-election in Florida, a state with more elderly people than in any other state in America.” Now This death blow.
So finally we found the problem that Biden, Trump, And McConnell agrees! And that’s why any talk of benefit cuts – whatever they’re called “changes” or “reforms” or whatever is not the beginning. (And speaking of politicians trying to “shut down” popular programs like Social Security and Medicare, it should be noted that Senator Joe Biden introduced legislation in 1975 that was supposed to do just that. The idea wasn’t popular back then either.)
Okay so this policy. But what about substance question: the fiscal cost of these programs? Medicare is projected to be insolvent by 2028, even as program costs rise. steadily throughout this century. Thus, without a change in policy, there is a huge choice: higher taxes and/or a sharp increase in deficits and debt. And the same grim prognosis is true for Medicaid and other health care programs. Democrats want to preside What? Most likely, the Democrats will answer: We will cross this bridge when we come to it.
For the rest of us, saving money on rights while keeping faith in worthy beneficiaries is best left for another time, though I wrote about it here at Breitbart News back in 2014. For group tl;dr: Treatment is cheaper than care. Hitting is cheaper than healing. But Republican officials looking to save on benefits while keeping their jobs may have to read the whole damn article.
Dallas Press News – Latest News:
Dallas Local News || Fort Worth Local News | Texas State News || Crime and Safety News || National news || Business News || Health News
texasstandard.news contributed to this report.
