Reagan Is Back in Style but Not in Spirit

President Donald Trump once again rolled out the egg-colored Reagan rug for his second term, but the Trump-Reagan similarities are running thin.

This Easter, we've hidden a dozen colorful, egg-centric stories across Reason.com. Hop around the site to find them—or click here to see them all in one basket.

 

The Oval Office, a room famous for its distinct ovum—er, oval—shape, has become synonymous with American democracy and the president himself. It's no wonder that each executive has sought to personalize their backdrop.

The room has been the main executive office since President William Howard Taft ordered a southward extension of the West Wing in 1909. The expansion was meant to mimic the shape of the Blue Room, the White House's other oval-shaped room, which incorporated a semicircle design overseen by President George Washington. Washington was the only president to never live in the White House, but his preference for oval-shaped rooms to receive guests with presidential drama and formality has become customary. 

Administrations succeeding Taft's have since altered the Oval Office's decor to suit each president's preferences. Shortly after returning to the White House for his second term, President Donald Trump removed the dark blue Clinton-era rug brought out of retirement by Joe Biden and replaced it with the lighter, egg-colored rug used by Ronald Reagan. 

Since Trump entered the world of politics, he has fancied himself a successor of Reagan and his policies. But unlike when he unveiled the Reagan rug at the beginning of his first term, there's a lot more evidence now that Trump and Reagan share little else in common. 

One stark difference is Trump's immigration policies. While Reagan sought to tighten border security with the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, he also granted amnesty for nearly 3 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Less than 100 days under Trump's direction, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) currently detains close to 48,000 migrants and controversially shipped 238 individuals in ICE custody to El Salvador, raising serious due process concerns and legal questions. Trump may even have acted in contempt of court by defying a federal judge's order to turn around the El Salvador–bound planes. So far, it seems Trump's immigration crackdown has been anything but "reasonable, fair, orderly, and secure," as was Reagan's objective. 

Trump also differs from Reagan over his second-largest agenda item: tariffs. In only his first three months, Trump has rattled markets worldwide due to the unpredictability of his trade war. The fallout from his "Liberation Day" tariff announcement prompted many to quote none other than Reagan himself on the dangers of engaging in trade wars. Reagan advocated for free trade, believing that high tariffs only hurt Americans in the long run and that trade wars "weake[n] our economy, our national security, and the entire free world." In contrast, even though Trump instituted a 90-day pause for his tariffs, tensions with China have only continued to rise, leading to tariffs as high as 245 percent for certain goods. 

So while Trump may have brought back Reagan's rug, it's clear he's cracked away from much of the former president's legacy. Style is easy to replicate, but substance is harder to come by.

Comments

[AT]

BREAKING: Donald Trump is not a clone of Ronald Reagan!

[Don't look at me! (Tariffs are killing the penguin industry!)]

He dares to succeed where Reagan failed?

[Nobartium]

Worse yet, he learned from his mistake: don't trade amnesty for security.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

I don't know. Both of them sent drug dealers to Central America.

[Sarah Palin's Buttplug - Jan 6 = 9/11 (same motive)]

Ronnie saw the Soviets as an adversary. Donnie sees the Soviets as a positive role model for America.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

Uh, sure. Now who was it that recently praised bread lines?

[Sarah Palin's Buttplug - Jan 6 = 9/11 (same motive)]

The contemptible Bernie Sanders? If you think I ever liked that jackass you are sorely mistaken.

In fact his protectionist pro-Soviet populism is sickening to me and reminds me of Donnie.

Why do you idiots get my politics wrong? I am a globalist, capitalist, open society secular humanist.

[Don't get eliminated(How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer penguin meat)]

Nobody believes your bullshit. Now turn yourself in for your crimes against children.

[Mother's Lament - (Sarcasian Meanister of Foreign Affairs)]

"I am a globalist, capitalist, open society secular humanist" in the style of Mussolini, Louis XIV, Alexander III of Russia, and Ibn Saud. Autocratic, anti-liberal and corporatist.

[Don't get eliminated(How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer penguin meat)]

Shrike’s hero:

How George Soros's Youth Informed His War on the West

There are men whose lives are defined by tragedy. Then there are those who define tragedy, wielding their scars not as reminders of what should be avoided, but as tools to reconstruct the world in their own anguished image. George Soros, born György Schwartz in 1930 Budapest, is often regarded as a philanthropist, a financier, a globalist idealist. But the truth is far more unsettling. His formative years, lived as a Jewish teenager under Nazi occupation, did not merely teach him survival. They taught him something far darker: that moral boundaries are elastic, and that power accrues to those who understand this first.
In 1944, Nazi Germany tightened its grip on Hungary. Over half a million Hungarian Jews were deported to extermination camps. Tivadar Schwartz, Soros’s father, saw the storm coming and acted. He secured false papers for his family, including young George, and sent him to live under a Christian alias, Sándor Kiss, with one Baumbach, a Hungarian official in the Ministry of Agriculture.
Baumbach, it turns out, was no neutral bureaucrat. He was a cog in the vast machinery of state-sponsored theft and ethnic cleansing. His task: to catalog and confiscate the estates of Jews deported to Auschwitz. His accomplice, or perhaps merely his shadow, was George Soros. The boy accompanied Baumbach on inventory missions, including one to the opulent estate of Baron Moric Kornfeld, a Jewish industrialist who had recently been arrested. Soros has since insisted that he was merely present, a bystander watching history's machinery grind forward. But he also, by his own admission, helped.
In a chilling 1998 interview with CBS's 60 Minutes, Soros, then 68, was asked if the experience left him traumatized. He answered: "Not at all. Not at all." He described the events with clinical detachment, likening himself to an impartial observer of an unstoppable tide. Asked if he felt guilt, he answered, "No," elaborating that someone else would have taken the property anyway, so his presence was morally neutral. To most people, the logic of "if I hadn't done it, someone else would have" is the language of moral abdication. To Soros, it was the foundation of character.

https://x.com/amuse/status/1911114505557262410

[Don't get eliminated(How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer penguin meat)]

You were banned for posting a link to child porn.

[Rick James]

The Democrats hate Russia, because they yearn for the Soviets to come back.

[Earth-based Human Skeptic]

'Less than 100 days under Trump's direction, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) currently detains close to 48,000 migrants and controversially shipped 238 individuals in ICE custody to El Salvador, raising serious due process concerns and legal questions.'

I think I have figured out what Democrats and TDS-riddled critics mean by "due". If any process, fast or protracted, ends up in deportation, it is not "due". Only endless stalling, or decisions like Amnesty! can be "due".

[Don't get eliminated(How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer penguin meat)]

Another comic to make me laugh!

[Longtobefree]

" . . . he also granted amnesty for nearly 3 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States."

In exchange for the promise of the democrats that they would close the border.
Never, ever, trust a democrat.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Still waiting on that visa exit system democrats promised in 86.

[BYODB]

Yeah, I was going to comment on that in particular as well since apparently the author is either entirely ignorant about the reasons for that amnesty or is intentionally lying about it.

Where Reagan fucked up on that one was trusting Democrats. This is one reason why there hasn't been another mass amnesty since Reagan. It is known that the Democrats won't hold up their side of the bargain.

It's almost like conservatives have tried to work with Democrats on immigration but been burned by their efforts time and time again.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

But the simple truth is that we've lost control of our own borders, and no nation can do that and survive.

...

The ongoing migration of persons to the United States in violation of our laws is a serious national problem detrimental to the interests of the United States.

Reagan

[Don't get eliminated(How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer penguin meat)]

Never, ever, trust an open borders advocate.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Reagan advocated for free trade, believing that high tariffs only hurt Americans in the long run and that trade wars

Glad Reagan never issued a tariff then. Or reality would get awkward around the narrative.

[Don't get eliminated(How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer penguin meat)]

Poor stupid Autumn:

https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa107.pdf

[Don't get eliminated(How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer penguin meat)]

Update from a previous commentariat story, lol:

“Life comes at you fast.”

https://x.com/joma_gc/status/1913964486702072243

[sarcasmic]

Nothing about 4/20 Day?

[sarcasmic]

Reagan surrounded himself with people who understood economics.

Trump is willfully ignorant on the subject, as are his defenders.
I’m sure Jesse the dipshit will, if he hasn’t already, say that Reagan had tariffs. And that is true. The difference is the tariff rates. Reagan was not a protectionist like the game show host in chief who is currently doing his best to wreck the world economy.

[Mother's Lament - (Sarcasian Meanister of Foreign Affairs)]

Reason economic expert, Sarcasmic, folks.

Trump is the dumb one, which is why Sarc has a billion dollar real estate empire and Trump is a formerly homeless short order cook in Maine.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Trump never even ended up homeless.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Lol.

You didn't know 2 years ago he had issued tariffs because you're fucking ignorant. Was hilarious.

And even in this comment he doesn't realize that one of his tariffs was solely protectionary. Want to know which one sarc?

One day you and Boehm will end up correct with a prediction. It will be by accident of course.

[Rick James]

but the Trump-Reagan similarities are running thin.

It's true. For instance, Reagan put massive tariffs on Japanese goods...

[Mother's Lament - (Sarcasian Meanister of Foreign Affairs)]

Reagan Imposes 100% Tariffs on Japan Goods : Retaliatory Sanctions Aimed at $300 Million in Electronic Products in Semiconductor Dispute

By TOM REDBURN and DONNA K. H. WALTERS
March 28, 1987 12 AM PT

Times Staff Writers

WASHINGTON — President Reagan decided Friday to impose punitive 100% tariffs on a wide variety of goods produced by Japanese electronic giants in retaliation for Tokyo’s failure to abide by the semiconductor trade agreement between the two nations.

In approving a recommendation Thursday by the Administration’s top economic officials, the White House decided to put the tariffs into effect about April 17, less than two weeks before Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone is scheduled to begin a visit to the United States aimed at easing trade frictions.

The tariffs will be targeted to bring in as much as $300 million and designed to punish such firms as NEC Corp., Hitachi Ltd., Fujitsu Ltd., Toshiba Corp. and Oki Corp. by either pricing some of their goods out of the American market or by forcing them to accept substantial losses on U.S. sales.

Little Consumer Effect

But American consumers should not suffer much from the steep tariffs on such goods as color television sets, personal computers, disc drives, power tools and commercial photo film because the products chosen are also manufactured by firms in the United States or other nations that are expected to continue to supply competitive goods at existing prices.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Sounds very trumpian. Luckily sarc has you on mute to avoid learning.

[Mother's Lament - (Sarcasian Meanister of Foreign Affairs)]

Proclamation 5601 -- Imposition of Increased Tariffs on Imports of Certain Articles From the European Economic Community

January 21, 1987

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

1. On March 31, 1986, I announced my decision, pursuant to section 301(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (the Act) (19 U.S.C. 2411(a)), to take action in response to restrictions imposed by the European Economic Community (EEC) affecting imports of United States grain and oilseeds into Spain and Portugal. I determined that these restrictions deny benefits to the United States arising under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) (61 Stat. (pts. 5 and 6)), are unreasonable, and constitute a burden and restriction on United States commerce (51 F.R. 18294). Accordingly, in Proclamation 5478 of May 15, 1986 (51 F.R. 18296), pursuant to section 301 (a), (b), and (d)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 2411 (a), (b), and (d)(1)), I imposed quantitative restrictions on imports of certain articles from the EEC in response to the EEC restrictions in Portugal.

2. In Proclamation 5478, I also announced my decision, in response to the withdrawal of tariff concessions and the application of the EEC variable levy on Spanish imports of corn and sorghum, to suspend temporarily, pursuant to section 301 (a), (b), and (d)(1) of the Act, the tariff concessions made by the United States under the GATT on articles described in Annex II to that proclamation. I made no immediate change in the U.S. duty rates for these articles in order to afford the EEC an opportunity to provide, by July 1, 1986, adequate compensation for the imposition of variable levies on imports of corn and sorghum into Spain. I further stated that, in the event such compensation were not provided by July 1, 1986, I would proclaim increased duties for these articles as appropriate. Having due regard for the international obligations of the United States, I decided that any such increased duties on these articles would be applied on a most-favored-nation basis.

3. On July 2, 1986, the United States and the EEC reached an interim agreement whereby the EEC agreed to take measures to avoid harm to U.S. sales of corn and sorghum to the EEC for the 6-month period ending December 31, 1986. In return, the United States agreed to defer action on the imposition of increased duties on imports of certain articles into the United States during this period so as to allow time for negotiation of a definitive settlement.

4. Despite extensive negotiating efforts throughout 1986, the EEC has not yet agreed to provide satisfactory compensation. Accordingly, I have determined, pursuant to section 301 (a), (b), and (d)(1) of the Act, that increased duties should be imposed on a most-favored-nation basis on the articles provided for in the Annex to this proclamation. Pursuant to general headnote 4 to the Tariff Schedules of the United States (19 U.S.C. 1202), the U.S. rates of duty for countries not receiving most-favored-nation treatment will be modified accordingly.

5. In the event that the EEC provides adequate compensation for the imposition of variable levies on corn and sorghum imports, or if other circumstances so warrant, I am authorizing the United States Trade Representative to suspend, modify, or terminate the increased duties imposed by this proclamation upon publication in the Federal Register of notice of his determination that such action is in the interest of the United States. Such suspension, modification, or termination shall be on a most-favored-nation basis.

Now, Therefore, I, Ronald Reagan, President of the United States of America, acting under the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the statutes of the United States, including but not limited to section 301 (a), (b), and (d)(1) and section 604 of the Act (19 U.S.C.. 2483), do proclaim that:

1. Subpart B of part 2 of the Appendix to the Tariff Schedules of the United States is modified as provided in the Annex to this proclamation.

2. The United States Trade Representative is authorized to suspend, modify, or terminate the increased duties imposed by this proclamation upon publication in the Federal Register of his determination that such action is in the interest of the United States.

3. This proclamation shall be effective with respect to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after January 30, 1987.

In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand this 21st day of January, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and eighty-seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and eleventh.

Ronald Reagan

[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 12:01 p.m., January 22, 1987]

Note: The annex was printed in the "Federal Register'' of January 26.

Date
01/21/1987

[Rick James]

because the products chosen are also manufactured by firms in the United States or other nations that are expected to continue to supply competitive goods at existing prices.

What's interesting about this is, this was a time when America still had some industrial capacity. The anti-tariff argument being made now (and it's not an illegitimate argument) is that there literally is no alternative. We simply don't make anything here and those 'productivity graphs' that show America's manufacturing capacity going up, (up up and away!!!) are literally taking American manufacturing firms that manufacture in China into account-- like my billion dollar company which is like every other billion dollar manufacturing firm. So I would agree, Trump's tariffs are very likely to affect consumer prices.

[JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)]

Strict libertarians and ardent free traders have long criticized Reagan for what they perceived as hypocrisy on trade, as he instigated or signed off on numerous protectionist measures throughout his presidency, starting with his first months in office in 1981.

...

Reagan also secured agreements from several European and Latin American nations to adopt similar "voluntary" quotas on steel exports to the U.S. Additionally, Reagan imposed protectionist measures on textiles, specialty steel, Canadian wood products, Italian pasta, motorcycles, and even mushrooms during his two terms. In 1986, Reagan threatened to impose a 200 percent tariff on Spain for its restrictions on U.S. grain imports.

.

Heeding this pressure, in 1984 alone (an election year, to be sure), the Reagan Administration filed over 200 petitions with the International Trade Commission for relief (meaning retaliatory tariffs) from foreign market protection. During that same year, Reagan was quietly encouraging the efforts of the Emergency Committee for American Trade, a business group formed to oppose protectionist trade bills.

Yet sarc right above is showing his argument from ignorance.

https://www.civitasinstitute.org/research/trade-protection-and-tariffs-from-reagan-to-trump