THIS IS EERIE=> 2016 Is Shaping Up to Be an EXACT Repeat of 1980 …(Except Carter Wasn’t So Sickly)
A young Donald Trump with President Ronald Reagan
This is almost eerie…
If you look at media reports and public sentiment from 1980, this year’s presidential race appears to be exactly like the Reagan-Carter race of 1980.
Via Hennessey’s View:
You probably remember that in September 1980 voters were couldn’t wait to cast a vote for Reagan.
If you remember it like that, you remember wrong. At least a little wrong.
TIME magazine examined voter sentiment in its September 15, 1980, issue. Voters that year sounded a lot like voters this year. Here’s how TIME’s Ed Magnuson summarized the voters of 1980:
Disenchanted, but not apathetic. Caring about issues, although much more concerned about character. Longing for a strong person to trust, but fearful of strength lacking sound judgment. Leery of weakness, but edgy about brashness. All too mindful of the disappointments of the past, but seeking hope in the future. Leaning toward one man, but often out of desperation and a sense of disdain for the others. Uncommitted. Unpredictable.
In 1980, people knew Carter was weak and bumbling, but they were afraid Reagan might blow up the world. In 2016, we know Clinton is crooked and sickly, and some people are afraid Trump might blow up the world. (In fact, almost every Republican candidate since Goldwater was supposed to blow up the world. That charge is getting pretty stale.)
The Numbers Are Remarkably Similar
When you look at the numbers from about the same period, you find incredible similarities between Clinton vs. Trump and Carter vs. Reagan. Since Rasmussen is the only major public poll looking at likely voters (as opposed to registered voters), we’ll use that.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online White House Watch survey of Likely U.S. Voters shows Clinton with 41% support to Trump’s 39% . Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson picks up nine percent (9% ) of the vote, while Green Party nominee Jill Stein trails with three percent (3% ). Three percent (3% ) like some other candidate, and five percent (5% ) are undecided.
And from TIME September 15, 1980:
Carter and Reagan are deadlocked at 39% each, while Anderson’s support is 15% —precisely the level set by the League of Women Voters for him to qualify as a “viable” candidate and therefore earn a third spot in its crucial opening debate, set tentatively for Sept. 21 in Baltimore.
If you combined support for Green Party’s Stein with support for Libertarian Party’s Johnson and the 3 percent who favor “some other candidate,” third party candidates would be at . . . 15 percent. Amazing, right?
You probably know that a lot of people have negative feelings about both Clinton and Trump. The same was true in 1980:
Fully 55% say they are not “personally interested or excited about” any of the candidates. Only 11% report genuine enthusiasm for Reagan; a mere 9% feel that way about Carter and 6% about Anderson. In fact, much of the support given their preferred candidates is based on voters’ opposition to the others; the choices are essentially and votes. Thus 43% of the voters who prefer Reagan say they do so because they are “really voting against Carter.” Similarly, 34% of Carter’s supporters say their choice is based on opposition to Reagan, while a hefty 61% of Anderson’s followers admit that they are motivated by being “against Carter and Reagan.”
Read the rest here.
It’s uncanny how this year’s race is shaping up to look just like the 1980 Reagan landslide.
The only difference is one candidate this year is so sickly.