What were the main reasons for the rise in conservatism in the Nixon, Reagan, and H.W. Bush era?

Question

What were the main reasons for the rise in conservatism in the 1980's through Clinton's administration (which I know had minimal conservatism)?

Answer 1

Responsibility and accountability. The DNC pushes for more social programs, which inturn raises taxes. And, they push to try and make everything "Even," by legislating that they take from those who have succeeded and give to those who have not. Social programs remove the effect part of "Cause and Effect." People who make bad decisions do not have to own up to or answer for and live with what they've sown. The excessive taxation tends to stall the economy -- the double and triple digit inflation of the Carter era is a prime example. With the conservatives in office, social programs come under scrutany for excess waste and fraud. A lot of those programs get cut and amazingly enough, the capitalist economy begins to breathe again and flourish.
Clinton had little to no clue as to what he was actually doing. And if you look closely, a lot of what he was doing was simply continuing the foreign and domestic policies of the two previous leaders -- and, he had to contend with a conservative house and senate.

Answer 2

Conservatism grew and continues to expand because of ever failing moral relativity amongst moderates and liberals. The conservative movement saw the decay in American society during the Carter years and vowed to somehow regain the country to its original form. It is a never ending battle with an opponent that is founded upon deception and misinformation. While yes the religious mode has been a driving factor, social change was its primary foundation. Clinton tried desperately to derail it only to get caught in his own deceit. Now his wife thinks she can kill it but unknowingly has resurrected many a conservative back into politics. Conservatism is far from dead, example, 2006 elections. The majority of those losing re-election were not conservatives. Every exit poll showed that the #1 reason for most losing re-election was not the Iraq war but a change and loss of conservative direction. As the GOP becomes more conservative, the harder it will become for the DNC to defeat it. Even though it is not about party politics, it is sad to see only one party embrace what the founding fathers wrote etensively about (I am a historian please spare me the fake rhetoric of liberal founding fathers). The liberalsim of the founding fathers is being classified today as religious fanatacism, right wing extremism and a bunch of other ignorant statements. The extremely few remaining JFK democrats are trying to recapture their party, America hopes they do. As for how conservatism failed, it hasn't.

Answer 3

Well, you need to distinguish between the gain in political power of the more right-wing conservatives and the general trend of American society--the latter hasn't been characterized by a particular trend toward the conservative. If anything the opposite is true.

The political areana is a different matter. Here there are two main factors. The first is that the GOP quite frankly was far more innovative in developing sophisticated campaign strategies from the mid-70s until the early 200s. With better organizational control, fund-raising, and a coherant message/party unity, they were simply able to out-compte the Democrats overall.

That, by the way, may be changing. Much of the GOP opportunity relied on new communications technology--and the form favored the sort of centralizeed party system of the GOP. But the diffuse nature of the Internet and its capabilities so far seem to be supplanting other forms of "getting the message out"--and the ultra-democratic level of access seems to favor the Democrats (so far, anyway).

The second reason is the ultra-right religious groups-the "Moral Majority," "Christian Coalition," " Evangelical Alliance," etc. These voters formed a easily led block that created a base for the GOP--but tha tincreasingly supplanted more centrist leadership. During the last 25 yyears, it was a powerful political tool.

It too, has weakened--and is unlikely to recover for many decades--if ever. This group drew its strength ultimately from people uncomfortable (sincerely and sometimes with good reason) with sme aspects of our modern world--a concern manipulated by the leaders of those organizations. But it was never more than a political springboard for that leadership--and as that has become increasingly clear, along with the hypocrisy and immorality of the neocon leadership, that rreligious core is eroding.

But--its a cycle. The USA is essentially moderate--but swings back and forth from one side to the other--its happened before and will happen again. The pendulum is starting to shift back to the liberal, jsut as it swung right 30 years ago.

Answer 4

The NeoConservatives formed an (unholy) alliance with the evangelical movement that seeks to make Christianity the national religion. The NeoConservatives wanted a big block delivered and the Evangelicals thought if they could control government they could make their ideals the law of the land. Billy Graham was employed to deliver his cult to Nixon and he did. Later, Mr Graham "repented" of his "sin" and decided to do his penance by delivering the Russians to Christ (and his cult.) against the wishes of Reagan who wanted America to fear and hate the Russians. (Fear is the oldest tool of leaders through time) Having lost Graham, Reagan's crew went to Jerry Faldwell and together they developed the "Moral Majority" which was not the majority, but appearances count.
The idea was to hit with both fists and penny slogans. Morality and Fear. Russians were the Godless, Evil Empire, waiting to attack us the first chance they got. Busting the lazy Liberals wasn't hard. Reagan did it with just one little phrase - "Card carrying liberal" which was echoed from the evangelical pulpits across the country. Liberals which believe in individual rights, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, holding government accountable to the people, were the driving force in the American Revolution were linked with the communists who Reagan had us fearing.
The Evangelical movement was gaining power over government. Pat Robinson was given the power to oversee the Republican platform for Bush Sr's re-Election bid. I firmly believe that Bush Sr saw that, he lost the election on purpose by showing no interest in it.

Clinton didn't embrace the evangelicals so they set about from the day he entered office to destroy him. They even circulated tapes they created insinuating that Hillary murdered a long time friend of the Clintons who had committed suicide. No smear was too bold, no unfounded accusation went unbelieved. Clinton came close to helping them out with his fiddling with Ms Lewinski who had been "wired" by the NeoCons for sound. But the ferver of the Evangelical/NeoConservative alliance backfired with the majority of Americans who having realised that the "unholy alliance" was attempting to take over America and run it in opposition to our Constitution, supported Clinton.

Recently, the corruption within the evangelical movement and the NeoConservatives the rank and file so strongly supported, has generated a major shift in the Evangelical movement. The leadership has splintered and many are re-thinking their alliance with political leaders. This is one reason Bush is loosing power along with the exposure of his lies and frauds in Iraq.

Now some evangelicals are even supporting the fight against global warming - a sign that we might be coming out of our "Dark night of the soul"

Let us pray.

Answer 5

Scum, organic scum, all of them. united statesa.`s company based political gadget has nicely and particularly f*cked up a wonderfully sturdy international, all via enrelenting and harsh thirst for wealth it strives so gain. united statesa. desires to possess something of cost interior the international and it will create famine,worry and conflict so as to get it. issues will substitute, and it`s as much as the prevalent human beings to do it. united statesa. can`t circulate on choking the lifestyles out of folk continually. the international desires compassion, not yet another A130.

Answer 6

People were begging for morality by which Dems have none. Shalom.

Answer 7

RACISM.