ABSTRACT
Political eras are launched by trigger events favoring one political party over another, a dynamic known as “political time.” As the years go by, however, parties tend to misread their strategic options, often overreaching. For example, presidents claim mandates where none exist, raising expectations they cannot satisfy. Political backlash results, as does increased polarization. In the Reagan era, President Bill Clinton saw his promise of universal health care founder without a vote, while George W. Bush’s claim to political capital was lost in a failed effort to restructure Social Security, prosecute the war in Iraq, and take on the Great Recession. Similarly, Barack Obama promised “change we can believe in,” while Donald Trump promised to “make America great again,” and yet each of these presidencies proved more polarizing than the last. A clearer understanding of historical context might lead to a more moderate approach and a more compromising style, as witnessed in the presidencies of Dwight Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy, both of whom understood their historical moment in time and who calibrated accordingly. Emulating their example would be a good first step to reversing the problematic trajectories of the past 30 years.
