Discussion: Could Ronald Reagan get nominated by today’s Tea Party?

Posted by: ST on August 28, 2012 at 6:34 pm

Well, just a short time ago, New Jersey pushed the delegate count to where it needed to be for Mitt Romney to now officially be the Republican nominee for POTUS.  Gotta admit, I never in a million years thought we’d be in the position we are today – nominating a guy mistrusted by so many in the base, but he’s “our guy” now, and we’ve got to do what we can to help him and Veep nominee Paul Ryan over the finish line come November.

Related to this, I often hear people say that – in today’s so-called “highly partisan” climate – today’s Tea Party would not have accepted Ronald Reagan back in his day, and certainly wouldn’t have worked towards nominating him for President (based on what we know of his time as President now – hindsight being what it is). What do you think?  I tend to discount this kind of talk, but I’m interested in hearing the views of my readers on this one.

Mitt Romney officially wins the GOP presidential nomination.
Photo courtesy of Fox News.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

7 Responses to “Discussion: Could Ronald Reagan get nominated by today’s Tea Party?”


  1. The notion Reagan could not get on the ballot of today’s GOP is a leftist canard and another way of saying the party has been hijacked by radicals. The primary campaign was beneficial in that it was so brutal and grueling; there is not a thing about any of the original nine that can be said that is new. It has to be frustrating for Obhammud since there is no “dirty laundry” in Romney’s background to earn him a hatchet job like that pulled on Herman Cain. He has been married to his high school sweetheart for the past 43 years and does not drink or smoke.

  2. Wendy says:

    While I don’t attend Tea Party meetings, I did participate in two April 15 rallies and I can assure you that people my age were big Reagan supporters so I believe he would be accepted. Most Tea Party people are not even looking at social issues. One can argue that some are so inflexible that a candidate who compromises would never get elected, but it really depends on where you live. It is no different than being a Republican in New York versus a Republican in Alabama – the cultures are so different that the extremes of the parties are very different, but ultimately come together to support the nominee.

  3. As could be expected the GOP convention proceedings last night were on-message and carried real substance unlike what can be expected from the commiecrat mob. The latest report is Shrillary will not attend. I will watch only to see if all “57 states” are represented.

  4. Phineas says:

    Reagan would have loved the Tea Party. Read his writings; you’ll see they’re an ideal fit for his philosophy and vision of America. I have no doubt he’d be resoundingly renominated today.

  5. Lorica says:

    I agree this is a leftist cannard, based on the compromises Reagan had to do in order to get the important things passed. I say if the Tea Party was around at the time, Reagan wouldn’t of had to compromise. – Lorica

  6. tommy mc donnell says:

    if wasn’t conservatives that didn’t accept reagan it was the establishment republicans, the same people that can’t accept the tea party.

  7. Carlos says:

    Reagan was not “the ideal” conservative candidate. But, then again, neither is Sarah. Or Michelle, Or any other person. There is no such thing as “the ideal” TEA party candidate.

    And Tommy McDowell nails it: it is the same “Republicans” who wouldn’t, couldn’t, accept Reagan that won’t, can’t, accept anyone to the political right of, say, Debbie Wasserman Swastika, Nazi Pelousy, Dingy Harry or Chucky Cheesy (don’t get between me and a camera) Schumer.