Woulc JFK Still be a Democrat Today?

[NYcarbineer]

lol, if JFK was so conservative, why wasn't he a Republican when he was alive?

And, if JFK was so conservative, why did the conservatives of his time hate him?

 

[bendog]

lol, if JFK was so conservative, why wasn't he a Republican when he was alive?

And, if JFK was so conservative, why did the conservatives of his time hate him?

Could it be ... wait for it .... wait for it ..... he wanted universal healthcare.

Seriously, this thread shoudl go down in infamy .. and flames

 

[NoNukes]

Lol, you don't have the authority to tell anyone jack shit, you fucking moron.

Eat shit, you god damned liar.

If you had anything substantial and intelligent to say, you would not need the insults.

JimBowie wants to have an unsupported opinion a fact.

Doesn't work that way. Will never work that way.

Do you mean Jim Crowie?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yup, and JB/JC ran away, again.

 

[KevinWestern]

lol, if JFK was so conservative, why wasn't he a Republican when he was alive?

And, if JFK was so conservative, why did the conservatives of his time hate him?

Well, you have to think about some of his policies and where they would fit into today’s political world. I would say without a doubt his social views were “liberal” in that he was a supporter of the Civil Rights movement, was against unnecessary war (unlike LBJ), etc. I suppose these views can be classified as “libertarian” as well.

JFK also wanted to end the Federal Reserve later in life (which is probably a more right-wing initiative) and also was an advocate of lowering taxes (which is definitely a right-wing initiative). When was the last time you heard Obama call for a 20% tax reduction across the board (including the rich)?

Overall, he was a good mix; conservative when it came to the finances and liberal when it came to the social equation.

 

[bendog]

lol, if JFK was so conservative, why wasn't he a Republican when he was alive?

And, if JFK was so conservative, why did the conservatives of his time hate him?

Well, you have to think about some of his policies and where they would fit into today’s political world. I would say without a doubt his social views were “liberal” in that he was a supporter of the Civil Rights movement, was against unnecessary war (unlike LBJ), etc. I suppose these views can be classified as “libertarian” as well.

JFK also wanted to end the Federal Reserve later in life (which is probably a more right-wing initiative) and also was an advocate of lowering taxes (which is definitely a right-wing initiative). When was the last time you heard Obama call for a 20% tax reduction across the board (including the rich)?

Overall, he was a good mix; conservative when it came to the finances and liberal when it came to the social equation.

But his idea for a tax cut left rates at 70% on the top bracket, didn't it? That ain't TPM areas. Further, he was adamently for veterans benefits, and using social programs to aid the middle class. That's why I call bullshit on the OP

 

[Bfgrn]

Woulc JFK Still be a Democrat Today?

No way. Can you imaging a Democrat leader uttering these words?

"It will include an across the board, top to bottom cut in both corporate and personal income taxes"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVwGIeD9i3I]JFK on Taxes - YouTube[/ame]

Can you imagine a Republican leader uttering these words?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWNhWANkq0Q]President Kennedy calls out the steel companies (1962) - YouTube[/ame]


News Conference 30 (April 11, 1962)

President John F. Kennedy
State Department Auditorium, Washington, D.C.
Wednesday, April 11, 1962, 3:30 p.m.

Official White House Transcript

THE PRESIDENT: "Good afternoon. I have several announcements to make.

The simultaneous and identical actions of United States Steel and other leading steel corporations, increasing steel prices by some 6 dollars a ton, constitute a wholly unjustifiable and irresponsible defiance of the public interest.

In this serious hour in our nation's history, when we are confronted with grave crises in Berlin and Southeast Asia, when we are devoting our energies to economic recovery and stability, when we are asking Reservists to leave their homes and families for months on end, and servicemen to risk their lives -- and four were killed in the last two days in Viet Nam -- and asking union members to hold down their wage requests, at a time when restraint and sacrifice are being asked of every citizen, the American people will find it hard, as I do, to accept a situation in which a tiny handful of steel executives whose pursuit of private power and profit exceeds their sense of public responsibility can show such utter contempt for the interests of 185 million Americans.

...a few gigantic corporations have decided to increase prices in ruthless disregard of their public responsibilities.

Some time ago I asked each American to consider what he would do for his country and I asked the steel companies. In the last 24 hours we had their answer."


"Harry Truman once said, 'There are 14 or 15 million Americans who have the resources to have representatives in Washington to protect their interests, and that the interests of the great mass of the other people - the 150 or 160 million - is the responsibility of the president of the United States, and I propose to fulfill it.'"
President John F. Kennedy

 

[Bfgrn]

lol, if JFK was so conservative, why wasn't he a Republican when he was alive?

And, if JFK was so conservative, why did the conservatives of his time hate him?

Well, you have to think about some of his policies and where they would fit into today’s political world. I would say without a doubt his social views were “liberal” in that he was a supporter of the Civil Rights movement, was against unnecessary war (unlike LBJ), etc. I suppose these views can be classified as “libertarian” as well.

JFK also wanted to end the Federal Reserve later in life (which is probably a more right-wing initiative) and also was an advocate of lowering taxes (which is definitely a right-wing initiative). When was the last time you heard Obama call for a 20% tax reduction across the board (including the rich)?

Overall, he was a good mix; conservative when it came to the finances and liberal when it came to the social equation.

Can you name a conservative who subscribes to Keynesian economics?

The New Frontier WAS Keynesian Economic policies.

“It is no contradiction – the most important single thing we can do to stimulate investment in today’s economy is to raise consumption by major reduction of individual income tax rates.” – John F. Kennedy, Jan. 21, 1963, annual message to the Congress: “The Economic Report Of The President”

Keynesian Economics

JFK’s administration adopted fiscal and monetary policies to close the recessionary gap. Economist John Maynard Keynes was a believer in Monetarism which is the theory that in order to stabilize the economy the government must lower or raise interest rates accordingly. Keynes also introduced the concept of aggregate demand which showed that full employment could be maintained only with government spending. JFK fully embraced this idea, he fueled the economy by investing in domestic, military, and space programs. This is also known as Kennedy's New Frontier. He proposed to give federal aid to education, medical care to the elderly, mass transit, as well as regional development in Appalachia which, in turn, would help the impoverished community for decades. President Kennedy signed the Housing Act of June 30th 1961 to aid middle income families as well as mass transportation users while also increasing urban renewal. Unfortunately, congressional support was limited therefore, his plans were downgraded by congress. JFK was a supporter of organized labor, he helped strengthen their rights with the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The President also looked to increase minimum wages and signed a bill in 1961 which expanded the minimum wage to $1.25.

Congress and Kennedy

Regrettably many of President Kennedy’s proposals were shot down by a conservative congress run by Republicans and Conservative Democrats. It is important to keep in mind that JFK won the electoral vote by 83 votes. Congress was more than reluctant to fund Kennedy’s liberal plans such as the funding of education and Medicare. President Kennedy was, however, able to sign legislation to raise the minimum wage and increase social security benefits – this was possible in part because of his Vice President L.B. Johnson’s extensive relationship with congress . On June 30th 1961 JFK signed a bill that would extend Social Security to over five million people.

"The largest single barrier to full employment of our manpower and resources and to a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of federal income taxes on private purchasing power, initiative and incentive." John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, special message to Congress on tax reduction and reform

Taxes

Kennedy's tax cut did not go into effect until after his assassination. The theory behind JFK's tax cuts was that when disposable income increases spending increases. This will directly affect aggregate demand. Fiscal expansion raises the demand for products. Increases in demand will lead to more output without changing the prices. Kennedy also introduced an investment tax credit meaning businesses can reduce their income taxes by 10% of their investment in a year. With increased spending and tax cuts, investments grew boosting aggregate demand. According to Andrew L. Yarrow author of Measuring America: How Economic Growth Came to Define American Greatness in the late 20th Century "...more evidence that Keynesian ideas, translated into policy, would further increase American growth and prosperity". The government also purchased bonds to increase the supply of money while reducing interest rates.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The real death blow to your argument and the ultimate irony is that Republicans OPPOSED Kennedy's tax cuts.

The Golden Age of Republican Deficit Hawks

Several readers wrote in, asking whether Republicans were ever really pro-tax, or if they merely put up with higher taxes in the name of fiscal discipline.

The answer is that once upon a time, Republicans did indeed advocate leaving taxes alone, opposing tax cuts.

In the 1950s and 1960s, federal deficits were relatively small compared to the size of the economy, but even during those flush years, Republican leadership was reluctant to advocate tax cuts. In 1953, for example, Dwight Eisenhower said the country “cannot afford to reduce taxes, reduce income, until we have in sight a program of expenditures that shows that the factors of income and of outgo will be balanced.”

And when his successor, John F. Kennedy, proposed sharp tax cuts in 1963, the more conservative Republicans in Congress initially opposed them because the cuts would expand the deficit.

The legislation eventually passed (after Kennedy’s assassination), but over the objections of about a third of the Republicans voting. Here’s the House vote, and here’s the Senate vote.


The right’s misplaced love of JFK tax cuts

When Kennedy cut taxes, he lowered the top marginal tax from 91% to 65%. Many congressional Republicans opposed his plan at the time, citing concerns that the treasury couldn’t afford such a tax break — the Republican Party used to be quite serious about fiscal responsibility, but it’s been a half-century — but Kennedy proceeded anyway because the higher rates, instituted during World War II, were no longer necessary.

Also at the time, the country had very little debt — Eisenhower, thankfully, kept taxes high throughout the 1950s — almost no deficit. Fiscal conditions, obviously, are far different now.

Keep in mind, unlike contemporary GOP policy, Kennedy’s plan distributed “peace dividends” broadly across the wage spectrum. As the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation explained at the time, the bottom 85% of the population received 59% of the benefits of JFK’s tax cut. The top 2.4% received 17.4% of the tax cut, and the top 0.4% received just 6% of it.

Those on the right who see themselves as descendents of the Kennedy policy are either deeply confused or they assume you won’t bother to learn the truth.

 

[KevinWestern]

JFK’s administration adopted fiscal and monetary policies to close the recessionary gap. Economist John Maynard Keynes was a believer in Monetarism which is the theory that in order to stabilize the economy the government must lower or raise interest rates accordingly. Keynes also introduced the concept of aggregate demand which showed that full employment could be maintained only with government spending. JFK fully embraced this idea, he fueled the economy by investing in domestic, military, and space programs. This is also known as Kennedy's New Frontier. He proposed to give federal aid to education, medical care to the elderly, mass transit, as well as regional development in Appalachia which, in turn, would help the impoverished community for decades. President Kennedy signed the Housing Act of June 30th 1961 to aid middle income families as well as mass transportation users while also increasing urban renewal. Unfortunately, congressional support was limited therefore, his plans were downgraded by congress. JFK was a supporter of organized labor, he helped strengthen their rights with the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. The President also looked to increase minimum wages and signed a bill in 1961 which expanded the minimum wage to $1.25.

I never said Kennedy would be a Republican, just said he probably wouldn’t be a Democrat if he were alive today and this is because he did employ a lot of the right-leaning policy of today (like cutting taxes), and also seemed to make a run against the Establishment in the years leading up to his death, putting him in more of the “independent” category.

Democrats and Republicans obviously have heavy financial ties to the largest banking Goliaths out there today, and would never advocate for a President to issue money via the Treasury (which is what Kennedy wanted to do) vs a semi-privately controlled Federal Reserve. Kennedy would have also likely ended the Vietnam conflict early, a move that the seemingly war hungry Dems and Republicans would also oppose (Dems voted to invade Iraq 58% in Senate, 40% in house, Obama drone attacks, push for Syria, etc). In that debate against Mitt, Obama was pretty clear he would NOT be reducing much of our annual war spend.

Regrettably many of President Kennedy’s proposals were shot down by a conservative congress run by Republicans and Conservative Democrats. It is important to keep in mind that JFK won the electoral vote by 83 votes. Congress was more than reluctant to fund Kennedy’s liberal plans such as the funding of education and Medicare. President Kennedy was, however, able to sign legislation to raise the minimum wage and increase social security benefits – this was possible in part because of his Vice President L.B. Johnson’s extensive relationship with congress . On June 30th 1961 JFK signed a bill that would extend Social Security to over five million people.

Again, I’m somewhat fiscally conservative and don’t oppose reasonable social safety nets. Rational conservatives don’t oppose ALL spending, just wasteful spending that often will drive negative consequences.

Kennedy's tax cut did not go into effect until after his assassination. The theory behind JFK's tax cuts was that when disposable income increases spending increases. This will directly affect aggregate demand. Fiscal expansion raises the demand for products. Increases in demand will lead to more output without changing the prices. Kennedy also introduced an investment tax credit meaning businesses can reduce their income taxes by 10% of their investment in a year. With increased spending and tax cuts, investments grew boosting aggregate demand.

I know that the tax cuts didn’t go into effect until after his death, but he was no doubt central in getting the legislation moving and (certainly) endorsed it. Again, the keyword (should have used earlier) is that I’d consider Kennedy a free thinking independent. At the core Kennedy had the idea that cutting taxes would actually increase revenues in the long run, which is the same reasoning that Republican George W. Bush used for cutting taxes in the early 2000’s. I’m just saying cutting taxes – to any degree – is not a “Democratic Party” principle in today’s political climate. And what the heck does it matter what "Republicans" thought of his tax policy in 1963 - we're talking about the Republican/Democratic parties of today.

The OP wanted to know what party he’d be in and I said “neither”, and no I don't think you have not dealt any "death blows" to my argument, lol.

 

[KevinWestern]

But his idea for a tax cut left rates at 70% on the top bracket, didn't it? That ain't TPM areas. Further, he was adamently for veterans benefits, and using social programs to aid the middle class. That's why I call bullshit on the OP

I get that, definitely, but it was a different time/different place. You can't go from 80%+ tax rate down to a 35% tax rate overnight.

What's important is which way did he want to push the momentum: less taxation or more taxation, and he chose less which is arguable a pretty straightforward example of "right-wing" policy of today. When was the last time President Obama asked for a tax cut at the top 10% of earners?

Democrats of today generally want to either maintain current tax levels, or add new ones (such as Obamacare, etc).

 

[bendog]

Well the heart of JFK's political core was the strong have a moral and social duty to help the not as strong. He believed that was the role of govt. To think that has anything in common with today's gop is .... bullshit. So, I call bs. Not at you, of course.

JFK was to the left of Slick .. by far. I can't offer an opinion on Obama because my opinion of him has always been that Obama's polical core is his ego.

 

[Bfgrn]

But his idea for a tax cut left rates at 70% on the top bracket, didn't it? That ain't TPM areas. Further, he was adamently for veterans benefits, and using social programs to aid the middle class. That's why I call bullshit on the OP

I get that, definitely, but it was a different time/different place. You can't go from 80%+ tax rate down to a 35% tax rate overnight.

What's important is which way did he want to push the momentum: less taxation or more taxation, and he chose less which is arguable a pretty straightforward example of "right-wing" policy of today. When was the last time President Obama asked for a tax cut at the top 10% of earners?

Democrats of today generally want to either maintain current tax levels, or add new ones (such as Obamacare, etc).

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.


Do you REALLY 'get that'? The high tax rate Kennedy inherited was designed to pay for the Great Depression and WWII. Kennedy faced a budget SURPLUS. Lowering the tax rate (91 percent on marginal income greater than $400,000 cut to 70 percent) made sense THEN. But it was not based on the voodoo economic dogma Reagan created.

NEWS FLASH...Reaganomics was the BIGGEST fiscal failure in American history...trickle down was REALLY trickle UP. Need proof?

Democrats today promote reasonable tax rates based on revenue requirements, not the right's "insidious doctrine"

 

[KevinWestern]

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.


Do you REALLY 'get that'? The high tax rate Kennedy inherited was designed to pay for the Great Depression and WWII. Kennedy faced a budget SURPLUS. Lowering the tax rate (91 percent on marginal income greater than $400,000 cut to 70 percent) made sense THEN. But it was not based on the voodoo economic dogma Reagan created.

NEWS FLASH...Reaganomics was the BIGGEST fiscal failure in American history...trickle down was REALLY trickle UP. Need proof?


Democrats today promote reasonable tax rates based on revenue requirements, not the right's "insidious doctrine"

You can save the flashy graphs and whatnot, I'm not arguing that Kennedy was a Reagan Republican (lol), or would be a Republican if he was alive in 2013. Kennedy would not relate very well to today's GOP.

However, I don't think he would be a Democrat either.

I think it's pretty undeniable that at this point both the Dems and Republicans have both become hyperpartisian, corrupt, and much more obsessed about ideology vs. rationality. As a free thinker who began to take steps to shift some of the power from the establishment back to the people, Kennedy today would be an independent.

 

[Bfgrn]

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.


Do you REALLY 'get that'? The high tax rate Kennedy inherited was designed to pay for the Great Depression and WWII. Kennedy faced a budget SURPLUS. Lowering the tax rate (91 percent on marginal income greater than $400,000 cut to 70 percent) made sense THEN. But it was not based on the voodoo economic dogma Reagan created.

NEWS FLASH...Reaganomics was the BIGGEST fiscal failure in American history...trickle down was REALLY trickle UP. Need proof?


Democrats today promote reasonable tax rates based on revenue requirements, not the right's "insidious doctrine"

You can save the flashy graphs and whatnot, I'm not arguing that Kennedy was a Reagan Republican (lol), or would be a Republican if he was alive in 2013. Kennedy would not relate very well to today's GOP.

However, I don't think he would be a Democrat either.

I think it's pretty undeniable that at this point both the Dems and Republicans have both become hyperpartisian, corrupt, and much more obsessed about ideology vs. rationality. As a free thinker who began to take steps to shift some of the power from the establishment back to the people, Kennedy today would be an independent.

If you want to speculate how JFK or RFK would fit into today's America, you don't have to look any farther than Ted Kennedy. He idolized his older brothers and dedicated his public life to carrying out their agenda and beliefs.

“For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.” —Teddy Kennedy

 

[Sallow]

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.


Do you REALLY 'get that'? The high tax rate Kennedy inherited was designed to pay for the Great Depression and WWII. Kennedy faced a budget SURPLUS. Lowering the tax rate (91 percent on marginal income greater than $400,000 cut to 70 percent) made sense THEN. But it was not based on the voodoo economic dogma Reagan created.

NEWS FLASH...Reaganomics was the BIGGEST fiscal failure in American history...trickle down was REALLY trickle UP. Need proof?


Democrats today promote reasonable tax rates based on revenue requirements, not the right's "insidious doctrine"

You can save the flashy graphs and whatnot, I'm not arguing that Kennedy was a Reagan Republican (lol), or would be a Republican if he was alive in 2013. Kennedy would not relate very well to today's GOP.

However, I don't think he would be a Democrat either.

I think it's pretty undeniable that at this point both the Dems and Republicans have both become hyperpartisian, corrupt, and much more obsessed about ideology vs. rationality. As a free thinker who began to take steps to shift some of the power from the establishment back to the people, Kennedy today would be an independent.

You're generally a smart guy..

But I think you're dead wrong here.

Kennedy would fit well into today's Democratic party. He was a self described Liberal interested in civil rights, stopping communism, and helping the poor.

 

[KevinWestern]

You're generally a smart guy..

But I think you're dead wrong here.

Kennedy would fit well into today's Democratic party. He was a self described Liberal interested in civil rights, stopping communism, and helping the poor.

Liberal? Of course he was. My point is that I think the Democratic party has been overrun by special interests in the past 30 years and don't think the JFK in later years would be able to warm to that. I don't think he'd be proud of Obama's decision to prosecute so many people calling out gov't wrongdoing, his signing of the NDAA 2012 and defending in court his ability to arrest people without trial, etc (I can go on for awhile, but won't).

In short, the Democratic Party has been compromised.

Perhaps he'd start an alternate left-leaning party, I wouldn't argue against that..

.

 

[DRrosenwinkel]

No. He's dead


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[elektra]

If John F. Kennedy was alive today, his brother Ted Kennedy most likely would not of murdered Mary Jo Kopechne.

 

[Sarah G]

You are the one claiming JFK would be a Republican today

Where did I ever say that?


Don't care. I'm not a republican

I think the Teatards would be up in arms....don't you?

again don't care.

Ummmmmmm.....so what the fuck you doing on this thread?

Good question.

 

[rightwinger]

"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.


Do you REALLY 'get that'? The high tax rate Kennedy inherited was designed to pay for the Great Depression and WWII. Kennedy faced a budget SURPLUS. Lowering the tax rate (91 percent on marginal income greater than $400,000 cut to 70 percent) made sense THEN. But it was not based on the voodoo economic dogma Reagan created.

NEWS FLASH...Reaganomics was the BIGGEST fiscal failure in American history...trickle down was REALLY trickle UP. Need proof?


Democrats today promote reasonable tax rates based on revenue requirements, not the right's "insidious doctrine"

You can save the flashy graphs and whatnot, I'm not arguing that Kennedy was a Reagan Republican (lol), or would be a Republican if he was alive in 2013. Kennedy would not relate very well to today's GOP.

However, I don't think he would be a Democrat either.

I think it's pretty undeniable that at this point both the Dems and Republicans have both become hyperpartisian, corrupt, and much more obsessed about ideology vs. rationality. As a free thinker who began to take steps to shift some of the power from the establishment back to the people, Kennedy today would be an independent.

JFKs politics would have closely followed his brother Teds

So would Roberts