Trump vs. Eisenhower.

The Washignton Times writes a story of how a Trump Presidency could be like Eisenhower's. This makes for an amazing Freeper thread, because it lets them bring in their historical biases, and they soon digress onto their fantasy historical Presidents. Before it devolves into a long, slow flamewar over whether Ike's 'instincts' were conservative.

montag813 loves Ike's for the one thing Freepers always mention. And the Military-Industrial Complex speech:

Operation Wetback forcibly removed 3.5 million illegal aliens
Ike warned about Military-Industrial Complex...which was ignored to our tremendous peril.

Just those two items made Ike a great president. If Trump does nothing but build a wall, freeze the massive Muslim influx, and and end sanctuary cities, then he belongs on Mt Rushmore

SoCal Pubbie is one of many younger Freepers whose analysis is not so deep:

I like Ike.

I was born during Ike’s term.

Me too.

TBP is part of a surprisingly large group who are still bitter about the 1952 Republican primary...

My family was for Taft. My mother and grandmother were at the convention as Taft volunteers.

Eisenhower, or rather, his supporters, stole that nomination from Bob Taft.

Out of proportion political grudge-holding runs in families, it seems.

fieldmarshaldj is not a fan of RINO Ike:

Ike did absolutely nothing to curtail the march of leftism begun under Hoover and exploded under FDR/Truman. He swiftly pissed away a mandate to roll back the Socialist agenda and the Dems ran away with a majority beginning with the 1954 elections (and culminating with the disastrous 1958 elections) that effectively ran for the next 40 years. He was the left-leaning establishment pol that has typified the GOP leadership forever since, with a brief vacation under Reagan. In 1952, the GOP ticket should’ve been Taft-MacArthur.

If Trump ends up another Ike, another Socialist RINO, this country is finished. I want Trump to be another Warren Harding, an excellent Conservative who actually rolled back Socialist government under Wilson and created the 1920s economic success story. Historians and the left hate Harding for that and rank him as one of the worst Presidents when he is the complete opposite.

Rockingham, on the other hand, argues that Ike had deep conservative instincts, but governed as a moderate.

A stronger analogy and basis for prediction is offered by consideration of the administrations of not just Eisenhower, but also Eisenhower's understudy, Nixon. Both possessed exceptionally shrewd political minds and, after periods of liberal excess, they were determined above all to put US national security and public finances on a strong footing. Toward those ends, they cultivated a moderate image and often followed moderate, consensus driven policies even though their deepest instincts were conservative.

Notably, both also put the GOP on a solid enough foundation that the party could afford a clear right turn after they were out of office. Even as we conservatives prefer that Eisenhower and Nixon had been more conservative, the scope of their achievement ought not to be ignored: at critical moments, they broke the advance of liberalism and made later eras of conservative victory possible. And, most of all, they helped restore US national power and put us back on a path to victory in the Cold War.

Needless to say, this does not fly with the Freeper purity brigade, and thus begins an argument-tumor that soon kills the thread.

But before then, Forward the Light Brigade explains that Trump will be like all the good part of all the good Presidents, and also will magically fix taxes and win the war on terror and put blacks in their place.

Trump will be unique in many ways—Some elements of IKE true, some of JFK, Some of Reagan, and a bit of Truman. He is his own man—for all his weak spots his leadership skills will win the day. 

1. He will build the wall. 2.He will reform taxes. 3. He will rebuild the Navy and army. 4. He will solve the immigration crisis. 5. He will crush ISIS and end the war on Terrorism. 6. He will end the racism/BLM movement. 7. He will re-stimulate the economy-—all in the face of unrelentingly opposition of the Media and Hollywood, The Democrats and colleges, and the international one worlders.

Unsurprisingly, nothing about the debt.

BlackElk would like to spend some time hating on Nixon for going to China:

Spare us any more Eisenhowers AND any more Nixons.

Nixon???? Kowtowing to Chairman Mao, Chou en Lai, et al., 1960 "Sellout on Fifth Avenue" to Nelson Rockefeller, Kissinger as Secretary of State, SALT treaty with the soviets, status quo on steroids, wage and price controls, devaluing the dollar, despised Reagan and actual conservatives, enshrined Luddite envirowhackoism in the federal government to harass business and landowners ever more. WHAT ACHIEVEMENTS???????

Reagan put a stop to the soviets with the threat of High Frontier. He bankrupted them. Nixon and Eisenhower had NOTHING to do with our victory in the cold war. They were conscientious objectors to the elimination of the soviets. Bush the Elder was a passive spectator when the Wall fell along with the ussr.

"Exceptionally shrewd?????" Puhleeeeeeze!

Timpanagos1 has his issue:

Earl Warren

Earl Warren

Earl Warren.

GOPsterinMA wants an anti-Muslim guy from the 600's, when crusades were cool:

Match Gane style: “I want Trump to be another (blank).”

I’ll go with Charles Martel.

Ike: Like Clinton, is considered “something” only because he WAS LUCKY enough to be POTUS during a booming economy.

Ohhh, Impy. Franco? A bloody Civil War and reign of terror is never what a country needs.

Harding and Charles Martel are good suggestions.

I’ll throw in, Francisco Franco.

GOPsterinMA chimes in with a historical conspiracy:

I’ll second Charles Martel. Exactly what we need today. I worked on Eisenhower’s reelection campaign but have never been sold on the man. He was more of a politician than he was soldier and I’ll never forgive him for siding with Montgomery over Patton. In the end he sold Patton down the river and that cost thousands of American lives.

Including Patton’s own life. He was assassinated.

Mollypitcher1 joins into the Patton worship:

Trump reminds me of Patton in many ways. It is easy to see he regards Patton (and MacArthur) as a hero. Show me a man’s heroes and I’ll show you the man. Go TRUMP!

...so what does it say that Trump is your hero?

Wneighbor always follows what her Daddy says, and Daddy liked McCarthy. She also seems to think Trump is talking like he's more conservative than Reagan.

I appreciate your points about Eisenhower. I was born during his administration so did not “live thru” it. One must study history but living in a time gives more information. As a youth I heard from my dad about his thoughts on current events to him under Eisenhower, Truman and just the end of FDR’s dynasty. Daddy mostly approves of Ike on military matters but he has a big issue over McCarthy. Daddy sees McCarthy as a hero. In today’s world the equivalent would be fighting terrorism and/or illegal immigration. Dad hates to this day what the media did to Sen. McCarthy and blames other politicians and Ike for not giving him more backing in the end.

I saw terrorism begin under Carter and yeah the Iranians released hostages the day Reagan took office but we continued to have terror attacks from Muslims under his watch. He also instituted a huge amnesty for illegals that I find fault with.

I don’t want Reagan or Nixon or Eisenhower. I want someone MORE conservative. Right now, I think Donald Trump is talking the right talk. I pray he gets elected and that he’s not just all talk.

Hardastarboard hates President Bill Clinton for his success:

Bill Clinton was the luckiest SOB on the planet. There’s no other way to explain his Presidency.