How did the republicans get to be seen as strong in military affairs?

[fujiyama]

How did this happen? Does it have to do with McCarthyism in the 50s during the Truman administration, where several members were accused of being soft on communists? Does it have to do with Jimmy Carter and his disasterous operation to save the hostages in Iran? Was it Eisenhower that gave them the edge? Oddly enough IKE wasn't very gung ho. He had seen the horrors of war and his FP was not very radical.

After all, it was the democrats that led the US to victory during WWII. Many of the democratic presidents up till Clinton had served in the military. I'm not sure about Johnson though.

I know that many were upset with Clinton getting out of Vietnam, but why were so many in the military upset with him over the years, or am I mistaken? Does anyone know how he did with military voters in '96? I know that Bush beat Gore among those in the military...

Have republicans been better for those in the military in terms of pay?

I just don't get why they have such an advantage...unless it's really just that the military in general is a conservative institution and it's really about the tough hawkish rhetoric of republicans.

[charlyvi]

1. One word....

Vietnam. Actually, two words....Vietnam and George McGovern.

[fujiyama]

5. Was it

because it was seen that the democrats got the country into Vietnam?

As for McGovern was he really able to shift the view of the democrats that much? After all, Carter did win the following election (though I guess that was because of Ford pardoning Nixon and it was a close election). It's unfortunate what happened to him. He was a war hero in WWII and was right about Vietnam...and the fact that he lost to a crook like Nixon.

[charlyvi]

7. Repubs thought LBJ managed the war badly...

Which is true; he micromanaged it. They thought he should fight it all the way, but LBJ tried to fight it politically as well as militarily, which turned out disasterously. There was a groundswell of antiwar sentiment in the US; LBJ decided not to run. The Dem challengers--Robert Kennedy, George McGovern, Eugene McCarthy--ran for the nomination by pledging to get us out of Vietnam. Repubs then began the mantra of Democrats being cowards, unreliable re national security, unwilling to fight a war, etc. It was the wrong war and we were there for the wrong reasons, but Republicans have it in their heads that we could have won it had we used "overwhelming force" to begin with. But we didn't; we withdrew instead, correctly in my opinion, and Republicans have tanished Democrats with causing the only loss we have ever had in a war. (Even though we withdrew from Vietnam under Nixon).

[charlyvi]

9. McGovern refused to use his

military service while campaigning. You have to realize what it was like back in those days. Anti-war demonstrations, the war moritorium, SDS, the Weathermen...it was pretty bizarre. Many people felt that being a war hero back then was not a plus. Vietnam was a curse on this nation--it is still with us to this day. Many people feel, myself included, that right wing social conservatism is a response to the liberal activism of the 60's. Anyway, McGovern ran as a peace candidate and the Repubs ate him alive--the first real smear campaign I can remember. Peace candidate=weak candidate to them and they've been singing the same song ever since. Sorry to be windy.

[Nile]

13. Jimmy Carter did not help either.

When he pardoned all of the Vietnam draft dodgers.

[rockymountaindem]

2. Johnson did serve.

As I believe he was in the quartermaster corps during WWII. He was also a sharp poker player at that time, and brought home $25,000 in winnings.

[charlyvi]

8. I know he served....

I never said he didn't. I meant that he totally mismanaged the Vietnam war--the only war we've ever lost. Republicans lay that loss at Democratic feet whether fairly or not.

[Old and In the Way]

3. I think you said it well.

"it's really just that the military in general is a conservative institution and it's really about the tough hawkish rhetoric of republicans."

For whatever reason, that's been the case. Certainly anti-war and Democrats have been associated together since the 60s. But I think it's really a media creation, ultimately.

Like, how does Bush poll better on protecting America? 3,000 Americans lost their lives on 9/11 because of his incompetence.

[enigmatic]

12. Right-Wing Radio propaganda is why..

The listeners to RW hate radio love being told what to think, and they are being told that Dems are week on defense, and Republicans are strong.

[fujiyama]

14. There was a great article

in salon.com a few months ago on how those in the military don't have any alternative to Limaugh. Apparently his show is broadcast on the military radio network.

Unfortunately it was under Clinton's admin that this was allowed to happen. Clinton's first SecDef (Les Aspin) was the one in charge of this. What an ass.

[zaj]

4. By being in the pocket of Defense Contractors....

... they get paid to fight for higher defense spending.

Thus they are always "fighting to make us safer". They could (and often are) fighting to waste billions of dollars, but that isn't quite so obvious, and doesn't translate into meme's and soundbites quite as well.

If Dems want to be "strong on defense", they are going to have to fight to outspend the Republicans.

That catch 22 just sucks.

[4morewars]

6. $3,000 hammers...

and $6,000 toilet seats. Halliburton is currently charging us $96.00 per sheet of plywood ($14.00 for the same piece at home depot). At the same time *president stupid cuts military pay and benefits. We live in bizzarro world.

[Yupster]

10. Pretty much through my whole

adult life (I'm 46) the fight in Washington has been between Republicans who want to "rebuild" the miltary and Democrats who want to reduce spending on the military and use the savings at home.

This has been reflected in countless votes over weapons systems and budgets etc.

It's hard to see it as much of a surprise that most poor people vote Democratic since the party is usually fighting for bigger budgets to help them, and most military vote Republican for the same reason.

[Nordic]

11. you're talking about the world we all used to live in

not the one we're living in now.

Everything is different now.

[AirAmFan]

15. DoD procurement has become a GOP political patronage system. Ike

warned about it forty-some years ago, but it has become FACT. "Defense" corporations pay for play by rewarding Republican Senators and Reps with disproportionate contracts in their districts as well as with campaign bribes.

Look what Clinton had to do as President: He had to appoint a REPUBLICAN (Cohen) as Secretary of Defense to have ANY semblance of control over what happened at the Pentagon. Thus the Pentagon bureaucracy only circumvented White House wishes 80 percent of the time rather than 100 percent of the time during Bill Clinton's term.

Just compare the geographic distribution of "Defense" expenditures (graphics at http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/taubmancenter/publications/fisc/fy1999/FY1999Summary.pdf )with the famous red-state/blue-state map of Y2K electoral votes ( http://www.usatoday.com/news/vote2000/electfront.htm )

Now additional tens of billions for Homeland Security and the CIA are in the sights of the "military industrial complex" too.