Ron Brownstein

Because you have Nixon's victories in 68 and 72 show real fissures in the Democratic coalition that had dominated the previous decades. And Carter seems to pull it all back together, you know, with just enough support among working class whites in the North and especially white evangelicals in the South. But in office.

Because you have Nixon's victories in 68 and 72 show real fissures in the Democratic coalition that had dominated the previous decades. And Carter seems to pull it all back together, you know, with just enough support among working class whites in the North and especially white evangelicals in the South. But in office.

Because you have Nixon's victories in 68 and 72 show real fissures in the Democratic coalition that had dominated the previous decades. And Carter seems to pull it all back together, you know, with just enough support among working class whites in the North and especially white evangelicals in the South. But in office.

Carter and then Biden can't hold this coalition together either legislatively or unpopular support. And after their four years, they get routed. So the scouronic argument is that the presidents we consider the most successful and consequential in American history are what he calls repudiating presidents who come in immediately at this hinge point after the last president of the previous cycle,

Carter and then Biden can't hold this coalition together either legislatively or unpopular support. And after their four years, they get routed. So the scouronic argument is that the presidents we consider the most successful and consequential in American history are what he calls repudiating presidents who come in immediately at this hinge point after the last president of the previous cycle,

Carter and then Biden can't hold this coalition together either legislatively or unpopular support. And after their four years, they get routed. So the scouronic argument is that the presidents we consider the most successful and consequential in American history are what he calls repudiating presidents who come in immediately at this hinge point after the last president of the previous cycle,

Right. So they come in at the moment when the previous regime has been the most discredited. So they have the most leeway to change direction. So he cites Thomas Jefferson in 1800 after Adams. Andrew Jackson in 1828 after Adams Jr., Lincoln in 1860 after Buchanan, Roosevelt in 1832 after Hoover, Reagan after Carter.

Right. So they come in at the moment when the previous regime has been the most discredited. So they have the most leeway to change direction. So he cites Thomas Jefferson in 1800 after Adams. Andrew Jackson in 1828 after Adams Jr., Lincoln in 1860 after Buchanan, Roosevelt in 1832 after Hoover, Reagan after Carter.

Right. So they come in at the moment when the previous regime has been the most discredited. So they have the most leeway to change direction. So he cites Thomas Jefferson in 1800 after Adams. Andrew Jackson in 1828 after Adams Jr., Lincoln in 1860 after Buchanan, Roosevelt in 1832 after Hoover, Reagan after Carter.

So that's what, I mean, by the way, that's what's ironic. I mean, I think there's a lot of reason to view Biden's experience as analogous to Carter's. However, there's a lot of reason to question whether Trump can seize the advantage created by that to the extent Reagan did. I mean, there's just no evidence in Trump's

So that's what, I mean, by the way, that's what's ironic. I mean, I think there's a lot of reason to view Biden's experience as analogous to Carter's. However, there's a lot of reason to question whether Trump can seize the advantage created by that to the extent Reagan did. I mean, there's just no evidence in Trump's

So that's what, I mean, by the way, that's what's ironic. I mean, I think there's a lot of reason to view Biden's experience as analogous to Carter's. However, there's a lot of reason to question whether Trump can seize the advantage created by that to the extent Reagan did. I mean, there's just no evidence in Trump's

history, and certainly even in this transition, that he is capable of speaking to a broad enough audience or has the instincts to do that, to take advantage of the opening that Biden has left him. But I would say, Tim, that I am sympathetic to the point of view that the opening that is there is similar to what was there after Carter.

history, and certainly even in this transition, that he is capable of speaking to a broad enough audience or has the instincts to do that, to take advantage of the opening that Biden has left him. But I would say, Tim, that I am sympathetic to the point of view that the opening that is there is similar to what was there after Carter.

history, and certainly even in this transition, that he is capable of speaking to a broad enough audience or has the instincts to do that, to take advantage of the opening that Biden has left him. But I would say, Tim, that I am sympathetic to the point of view that the opening that is there is similar to what was there after Carter.

Yeah. I mean, Skowronek says, you know, the repudiating presidents get so much power because they basically are able to point to their predecessor as the embodiment of a failed regime. And and this he wrote this in 1993. They hearken back to the past, often a mythic past. to say that America has to recapture those values in order to get itself going again.

Yeah. I mean, Skowronek says, you know, the repudiating presidents get so much power because they basically are able to point to their predecessor as the embodiment of a failed regime. And and this he wrote this in 1993. They hearken back to the past, often a mythic past. to say that America has to recapture those values in order to get itself going again.

Yeah. I mean, Skowronek says, you know, the repudiating presidents get so much power because they basically are able to point to their predecessor as the embodiment of a failed regime. And and this he wrote this in 1993. They hearken back to the past, often a mythic past. to say that America has to recapture those values in order to get itself going again.

And the Trump-Biden kind of sequence has a lot of similarity. Now, of course, the big difference is that objectively, the country is not nearly in as bad shape now as it was when Carter left office. So for Trump to argue that Biden has left him this big steaming pile of crap is a lot less credible than it was for Reagan.

And the Trump-Biden kind of sequence has a lot of similarity. Now, of course, the big difference is that objectively, the country is not nearly in as bad shape now as it was when Carter left office. So for Trump to argue that Biden has left him this big steaming pile of crap is a lot less credible than it was for Reagan.