I wonder what happens when a Democratic canidate for President campaigns on a proposal to increase taxes on high incomes and cut taxes on middle and lower class incomes (that is on the class warfare platform) ? IIRC what happens is that he gets elected. This is what Clinton did in 1992 and Obama did in 2008 (and Obama also kept the promise).
So Quiz question — who was the last Democratic candidate to defeat a Republican who
1) was not an incumbent
2) didn’t propose raising taxes on high incomes and cutting them on middle class incomes when the top marginal income tax rate was under
70%70% 62% even though this would have been constitutional ?
Answers after the jump
Woodrow Wilson defeated William Howard Taft in 1912*
Grover Cleveland defeated
James C Blain in 1880 James G. Blaine in 1884** and Benjamin Harrison in 1892 ***
James Buchanan defeated John C Frémont in 1856
Answer to trick question. No such entity exists. No Democrat who was not then President has been elected who did not propose lower taxes on middle classincomes and higher taxes on high incomes at a time when the income tax was constitutional and the top marginal rate was less than 70%.
The election of Hillary Clinton in 2016 (inshallah) would be unprecedented not only because she has no y chromosome but also because she is a non incumbent Democrat who has no proposal to cut middle class tax rates and raise taxes on high incomes(even though the top income tax rate is less than 70%).
* typo corrected thanks to sandwichman
** 3 errors corrected thanks to Barkely Rosser. The word “in” was not an error.
***typo corrected thanksto Bruce Webb
**** This is substantive. In 1932 the top rate was only 62%
“Woodrow Wilson defeated William Howard Taft in 1812.”
And then he did it again a hundred years later! 😉
To be fair, we haven’t yet seen Hillary’s platform for 2016 (heck she isn’t officially running yet, although we all know she will)
She could come forth with a very progressive platform when she announces her candidacy
Two errors still in place and on the same answer. So, it was not 1880 (GOP Garfield won that one only to be assassinated by a disappointed office-seeker, leading his successor Chester A. Arthur to introduce the civil service, which is why there are many nice housed in DC from the 1880s), and I am reasonably certainlty that the correct spelling of his defeated opponent was “Blaine” not “Blain” (and his middle initial may have been “g” but I am less certain on that one). Anyway, for sure the date is wrong.
Cleveland won in 1884 and 1892. Note that he was president when the 1983 depression hit.
“To be fair, we haven’t yet seen Hillary’s platform for 2016”
Here, have a gander: http://www.thirdway.org/programs
“Our aim is to challenge, and ultimately change, some of the prevailing assumptions that routinely define, and often constrain, Democratic and progressive economic and social policy debates. And by doing that, we’ll be able to help push the conversation towards a new, more modern understanding of America’s middle class challenges—and spur fresh ideas for a new era.”
According to Wikipedia (and confirmed by perusal of http://www.thirdway.org/trustees) “The board of the Third Way is made up almost entirely of investment bankers and other Wall Street executives.”
In short, “fresh ideas” from Wall Street “progressive” centrists (i.e., neo-liberals).
Mm, err “1992”?
H. Clinton seems to be W Bush for militarist foreign policy. Maybe US can tilt with China for control of Japan’s aspirations in the vast Pacific.
She should be good for Lockheed.
Progressives for the New American Century, the new PNAC.
Ilsm, If Bill persisted in ignoring the letters from the PNAC crowd, why do you believe it was only because they wanted to change the P?
Ilsm, The most famous example, I imagine is this letter:
The PNAC site used to have all the 1990s pontifications and letters in it’s history/archive. I don’t know if it is still there. I didn’t get a PNAC hit when I Googled for the above.