Opinion of Ronald Reagan?

[TheReckoning]

The fact that the Democrats on this board are calling the 7th best president ever (according to independent analysts) a HP show they aren’t as objective as they think.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/19/opinion/how-does-trump-stack-up-against-the-best-and-worst-presidents.html

Where in the article does it say that? I skimmed it but didn't see the partisan breakout.

This was telling however:
"It wasn’t just Democratic support that would carve F.D.R. on Mt. Rushmore: All groups, including Republicans, named him as most deserving of that honor.

Roosevelt, the godfather of presidential liberalism, received more than twice as many votes from Republicans as Ronald Reagan, his conservative counterpart."

It's not even close either.



Nice try. I see Reagan ranked 9th, not 7th overall. So I guess only independent and Republican scholars count? I mean, comone on, even Republican scholars rank FDR higher Reagan. In the words of the Gipper, "There you go again."

So there were 8 better than him. He's ranked behind Obama, Truman, both Roosevelts, Eisenhower, et al. I am simply expressing my opinions of him growing as a teenager in the rural South sourrounded by family members who suffered under his policies but worshipped the ground he walked on.

Nice try, bro.

They oversampled Democrats in their survey, and both Democrats and Republicans will be biased. So instead, I went with Independents.

And even still, 9th puts him in the top 80% of presidents. Not exactly a HP in my book.

And have you considered how well your family members under his presidency were is not the only factor in gauging the leader of 250 million people?

It’s literally right there in the article, where Presidents are ranked as party.

Also, I’m not really understanding you’re point. You’re saying, “FDR was better than Reagan. Therefore, Reagan sucked.” How does that make any sense? I think FDR was a FF as well, as was Obama, even though he’s ranked lower by Independent scholars than Reagan.

Because in my experience he did. So what more do you want? I can't stand the man and never have, even when he was elected when I was in 5th grade. He was president during my formative years and I always loathed him even though I was in the minority where I grew up.

I'm sick of hearing about Reagan and his f***d up policies. I have been thinking about how his rhetoric has led us to where we are the last few days. I don't think I'm alone in this sentiment either.

Of all the people responsible for the Catastrophe of Trump (especially these last few days), Reagan is the last one you want to blame. Don’t pin this on him just because he also had an “R” next to his name.

Reagan was by no means perfect, and I’m sure your families experiences are a reflection of at least some of his flaws. But I’ll never get over how he was able to put the nail in the coffin for the evil Communist Bloc.

Obama made choices that hurt me and the people I care about as well. But he still had a charm that made all but the most hateful Republicans smile.

The key is that nail in the coffin was the final nail of meny hammered in over the preceding 45 years. Republicans like to mythologize Reagan is some great Slayer of the great communist Beast, when all he did was run the ball in over the goal line after the rest of the team made a 95-yard drive before bringing him in.

Seriously, name one Reagan foreign policy venture which wasn't either already supported by 98 + percent of Democrats anyway ( e. G. The Grenada invasion, supporting the mujahideen in Afghanistan which started under Carter), or wasn't a colossal mistake which did nothing to advance our victory over communism (E.G. favoring so-called constructive engagement rather than sanctions with the apartheid South African government, our support of the Nicaraguan contras which was universally reviled by every democratic government in this hemisphere , and of course led to the Iran Contra debacle).

Conservatives like to claim that the fight checks Reagan wrote the Pentagon in the 80s somehow spent communist Russia to death and push them over the edge. Unfortunately that's not true. Military documents Declassified and obtained after the fall of the Cold War demonstrated that Soviet military spending did not increase particularly much for the ladies more than the rate of inflation. Reagan baited them to try matching the spending, but the Soviets didn't bite. Instead, we spend ourselves into enormous debt and created an unparalleled precedent for deficit spending, and in the process / social programs relied on by the poor and working class set defense contractors could make a bundle ( oh, and of course Finance huge tax cuts for the wealthiest).

It’s not just “conservatives” who think Reagan was a good president. Even Democrats rank him in the top 3rd.

And I also don’t think you understand just how evil the government of Nicaragua was at the time. Fighting them was necessary.

The non-conta opposition to the Sandinistas understood they were bad, and they adamantly and furiously opposed our supporting the Contras.

In answer to your question, not all that evil since they left on their own after being defeated in elections. Hell, even Trump couldn't do that! By your own rationale NATO shoumd be actively funding left wing paramilitaries in the US to figbt against Republican attempts to subvert Democracy here.

The more salient question is whether you realize just hiw evil the Contras were?

I can’t help but find it ironic that you condemn Reagan for providing support for a group trying to overthrow people who mass executed indigenous people- because you believe he played a role in the mass executions of indigenous people.

Your post makes zero sense. Elaborate?

My point is that Sandinistas were just as bad as the Contras.

Only, if they got in power, and Communism spread through Latin America, the Cold War may have ended VERY differently. Remember that.

Ah, the discredited domino theory. Your statement is at once both hyperbolic and fantastical. To say we needed to support a group of far right-wing bloodthirsty paramilitaries to remove a government which ultimately step down after losing a free election, let alone that it would have spread communism throughout Central America or even reverse the Cold War entirely, shows a breathtaking lack of basic historical knowledge.

Either way, while the financial support of Contras was questionable, it doesn’t discredit Reagan entirely because 1) It makes perfect sense as to why Reagan would oppose the spread of Communism, and 2) because Reagan’s presidency was much more than just this.

he was really patriotic and stuff.

You say that as is patriotism is not one of the most necessary requirements for being a good president.

[TheReckoning]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon.

In summation: HP

You focus only on the bad while leaving out important context. Yes, Reagan said a racist thing once. He was born in 1911 and had his early childhood under a president who supported the KKK, and he held some of the prejudices of that time. If you’re calling every president who’s said something racist once a HP, then Washington, Lincoln, LBJ, and pretty much all presidents pre-Reagan were HP.

I judge people's values and deeds based on the time they lived in. There were plenty of people who were not bigots in the 1960s and 1980s, and people who had plenty of exposure to outside groups and still were bigoted are worse human beings. Reagan was an adult in control of his facilities when he chose to deliberately pander to racists for their votes. Other Republicans who had presidential ambitions chose not to, even though they were doubtless aware of previous Lily White strategies. Not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes makes a politician an HP.

You think the same of FDR?

He didn’t just make a racist comment once. He sent hundreds of thousands to an internet camp.

How’s that for “not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes”?

Yeah, I think FDR was a sh**tty guy, though an effective wartime leader and one of the best American presidents on economic policy. He sent parts of my family back to Europe to die, I'm not championing his character or actions. Pointing to another president is running from the question asked. The question is if Reagan was a Freedom Fighter or a Horrible Person. He was an HP.

And dismissing eight years of giving voice and legitimacy to racists to act like it was just a few comments is why Republicans are not going to win back people of decency.

How exactly did Reagan “give voice” to racists?

One off-hand racist comment a decade before coming into office in a private conversation doesn’t negate all the good he did.

[OSR stands with Israel]

This poll is hilarious given he is ranked 8-12 to by most historians.


Anyway Massive FF

[OSR stands with Israel]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

On character, Reagan started his campaign outside Philadelphia, MS (site of the Mississippi Burning murders of civil rights activists) with a speech on states' rights. He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon. He failed to respond to the AIDS epidemic because his party was apathetic toward gay people (even if he wasn't personally homophobic). In retrospect we can peg him as a prejudiced man who inflamed situations when he should have been a leader.

Mississippi was a swing state in 1980 and the event he was speaking at was one of the top political fairs in Mississippi so of course he would speak there. Also actually read the states rights speech instead of just looking at one soundbite and you will see the only time he was referencing states rights came to economics in the speech not civil rights

[OSR stands with Israel]

The fact that the Democrats on this board are calling the 7th best president ever (according to independent analysts) a HP show they aren’t as objective as they think.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/19/opinion/how-does-trump-stack-up-against-the-best-and-worst-presidents.html

Where in the article does it say that? I skimmed it but didn't see the partisan breakout.

This was telling however:
"It wasn’t just Democratic support that would carve F.D.R. on Mt. Rushmore: All groups, including Republicans, named him as most deserving of that honor.

Roosevelt, the godfather of presidential liberalism, received more than twice as many votes from Republicans as Ronald Reagan, his conservative counterpart."

It's not even close either.



Nice try. I see Reagan ranked 9th, not 7th overall. So I guess only independent and Republican scholars count? I mean, comone on, even Republican scholars rank FDR higher Reagan. In the words of the Gipper, "There you go again."

So there were 8 better than him. He's ranked behind Obama, Truman, both Roosevelts, Eisenhower, et al. I am simply expressing my opinions of him growing as a teenager in the rural South sourrounded by family members who suffered under his policies but worshipped the ground he walked on.

Nice try, bro.

They oversampled Democrats in their survey, and both Democrats and Republicans will be biased. So instead, I went with Independents.

And even still, 9th puts him in the top 80% of presidents. Not exactly a HP in my book.

And have you considered how well your family members under his presidency were is not the only factor in gauging the leader of 250 million people?

It’s literally right there in the article, where Presidents are ranked as party.

Also, I’m not really understanding you’re point. You’re saying, “FDR was better than Reagan. Therefore, Reagan sucked.” How does that make any sense? I think FDR was a FF as well, as was Obama, even though he’s ranked lower by Independent scholars than Reagan.

Because in my experience he did. So what more do you want? I can't stand the man and never have, even when he was elected when I was in 5th grade. He was president during my formative years and I always loathed him even though I was in the minority where I grew up.

I'm sick of hearing about Reagan and his f***d up policies. I have been thinking about how his rhetoric has led us to where we are the last few days. I don't think I'm alone in this sentiment either.

Of all the people responsible for the Catastrophe of Trump (especially these last few days), Reagan is the last one you want to blame. Don’t pin this on him just because he also had an “R” next to his name.

Reagan was by no means perfect, and I’m sure your families experiences are a reflection of at least some of his flaws. But I’ll never get over how he was able to put the nail in the coffin for the evil Communist Bloc.

Obama made choices that hurt me and the people I care about as well. But he still had a charm that made all but the most hateful Republicans smile.

The key is that nail in the coffin was the final nail of meny hammered in over the preceding 45 years. Republicans like to mythologize Reagan is some great Slayer of the great communist Beast, when all he did was run the ball in over the goal line after the rest of the team made a 95-yard drive before bringing him in.

Seriously, name one Reagan foreign policy venture which wasn't either already supported by 98 + percent of Democrats anyway ( e. G. The Grenada invasion, supporting the mujahideen in Afghanistan which started under Carter), or wasn't a colossal mistake which did nothing to advance our victory over communism (E.G. favoring so-called constructive engagement rather than sanctions with the apartheid South African government, our support of the Nicaraguan contras which was universally reviled by every democratic government in this hemisphere , and of course led to the Iran Contra debacle).

Conservatives like to claim that the fight checks Reagan wrote the Pentagon in the 80s somehow spent communist Russia to death and push them over the edge. Unfortunately that's not true. Military documents Declassified and obtained after the fall of the Cold War demonstrated that Soviet military spending did not increase particularly much for the ladies more than the rate of inflation. Reagan baited them to try matching the spending, but the Soviets didn't bite. Instead, we spend ourselves into enormous debt and created an unparalleled precedent for deficit spending, and in the process / social programs relied on by the poor and working class set defense contractors could make a bundle ( oh, and of course Finance huge tax cuts for the wealthiest).

It’s not just “conservatives” who think Reagan was a good president. Even Democrats rank him in the top 3rd.

And I also don’t think you understand just how evil the government of Nicaragua was at the time. Fighting them was necessary.

The non-conta opposition to the Sandinistas understood they were bad, and they adamantly and furiously opposed our supporting the Contras.

In answer to your question, not all that evil since they left on their own after being defeated in elections. Hell, even Trump couldn't do that! By your own rationale NATO shoumd be actively funding left wing paramilitaries in the US to figbt against Republican attempts to subvert Democracy here.

The more salient question is whether you realize just hiw evil the Contras were?

I can’t help but find it ironic that you condemn Reagan for providing support for a group trying to overthrow people who mass executed indigenous people- because you believe he played a role in the mass executions of indigenous people.

Your post makes zero sense. Elaborate?

My point is that Sandinistas were just as bad as the Contras.

Only, if they got in power, and Communism spread through Latin America, the Cold War may have ended VERY differently. Remember that.

Ah, the discredited domino theory. Your statement is at once both hyperbolic and fantastical. To say we needed to support a group of far right-wing bloodthirsty paramilitaries to remove a government which ultimately step down after losing a free election, let alone that it would have spread communism throughout Central America or even reverse the Cold War entirely, shows a breathtaking lack of basic historical knowledge.

The Domino Theory wasn't discredited, the Soviets had the goal of turning the whole world communist.

Also Eisenhower took many similar actions in Latin America as Reagan did, and in many ways Reagan's FP was a return to Eisenhower FP which until Reagan's was by far the most confrontational to the Soviets during the Cold War.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Destroyed the middle class=obvious HP.

[OSR stands with Israel]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon.

In summation: HP

You focus only on the bad while leaving out important context. Yes, Reagan said a racist thing once. He was born in 1911 and had his early childhood under a president who supported the KKK, and he held some of the prejudices of that time. If you’re calling every president who’s said something racist once a HP, then Washington, Lincoln, LBJ, and pretty much all presidents pre-Reagan were HP.

I judge people's values and deeds based on the time they lived in. There were plenty of people who were not bigots in the 1960s and 1980s, and people who had plenty of exposure to outside groups and still were bigoted are worse human beings. Reagan was an adult in control of his facilities when he chose to deliberately pander to racists for their votes. Other Republicans who had presidential ambitions chose not to, even though they were doubtless aware of previous Lily White strategies. Not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes makes a politician an HP.

You think the same of FDR?

He didn’t just make a racist comment once. He sent hundreds of thousands to an internet camp.

How’s that for “not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes”?

Yeah, I think FDR was a sh**tty guy, though an effective wartime leader and one of the best American presidents on economic policy. He sent parts of my family back to Europe to die, I'm not championing his character or actions. Pointing to another president is running from the question asked. The question is if Reagan was a Freedom Fighter or a Horrible Person. He was an HP.

And dismissing eight years of giving voice and legitimacy to racists to act like it was just a few comments is why Republicans are not going to win back people of decency.

I would argue that Reagan set of a better economic boom than FDR did, and would argue 1983-2001 was when we were at our peak not 1946-1963. The neoliberal consensus set out by Reagan did a lot of good and yes eventually it broke down but so did the post-war consensus as not everything can last forever and not everything is positive.


Bill Clinton mostly followed this economic consensus with deregulation, expansion of the type of free trade Reagan first proposed, welfare reform, capital gains tax cuts showing how influential Reagan was as a Democratic President economic policies turned out to be more similar to Reagan's than even the Rockefeller Republicans of the 1960s were let alone the Democrats of that era

[Alcibiades]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

On character, Reagan started his campaign outside Philadelphia, MS (site of the Mississippi Burning murders of civil rights activists) with a speech on states' rights. He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon. He failed to respond to the AIDS epidemic because his party was apathetic toward gay people (even if he wasn't personally homophobic). In retrospect we can peg him as a prejudiced man who inflamed situations when he should have been a leader.

Mississippi was a swing state in 1980 and the event he was speaking at was one of the top political fairs in Mississippi so of course he would speak there. Also actually read the states rights speech instead of just looking at one soundbite and you will see the only time he was referencing states rights came to economics in the speech not civil rights

I think his audience understood perfectly well what he meant by “states’ rights”, the most infamous racial dogwhistle in all politics.

[OSR stands with Israel]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

On character, Reagan started his campaign outside Philadelphia, MS (site of the Mississippi Burning murders of civil rights activists) with a speech on states' rights. He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon. He failed to respond to the AIDS epidemic because his party was apathetic toward gay people (even if he wasn't personally homophobic). In retrospect we can peg him as a prejudiced man who inflamed situations when he should have been a leader.

Mississippi was a swing state in 1980 and the event he was speaking at was one of the top political fairs in Mississippi so of course he would speak there. Also actually read the states rights speech instead of just looking at one soundbite and you will see the only time he was referencing states rights came to economics in the speech not civil rights

I think his audience understood perfectly well what he meant by “states’ rights”, the most infamous racial dogwhistle in all politics.

lmao the problem with his admin was he abandoned any pretense of sending powers back to the states and instead helped grow the powers of the federal government as well

There was nothing wrong with the statement once you look at the context and the only problem actually is he didnt follow through on it

[Badger]

The fact that the Democrats on this board are calling the 7th best president ever (according to independent analysts) a HP show they aren’t as objective as they think.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/19/opinion/how-does-trump-stack-up-against-the-best-and-worst-presidents.html

Where in the article does it say that? I skimmed it but didn't see the partisan breakout.

This was telling however:
"It wasn’t just Democratic support that would carve F.D.R. on Mt. Rushmore: All groups, including Republicans, named him as most deserving of that honor.

Roosevelt, the godfather of presidential liberalism, received more than twice as many votes from Republicans as Ronald Reagan, his conservative counterpart."

It's not even close either.



Nice try. I see Reagan ranked 9th, not 7th overall. So I guess only independent and Republican scholars count? I mean, comone on, even Republican scholars rank FDR higher Reagan. In the words of the Gipper, "There you go again."

So there were 8 better than him. He's ranked behind Obama, Truman, both Roosevelts, Eisenhower, et al. I am simply expressing my opinions of him growing as a teenager in the rural South sourrounded by family members who suffered under his policies but worshipped the ground he walked on.

Nice try, bro.

They oversampled Democrats in their survey, and both Democrats and Republicans will be biased. So instead, I went with Independents.

And even still, 9th puts him in the top 80% of presidents. Not exactly a HP in my book.

And have you considered how well your family members under his presidency were is not the only factor in gauging the leader of 250 million people?

It’s literally right there in the article, where Presidents are ranked as party.

Also, I’m not really understanding you’re point. You’re saying, “FDR was better than Reagan. Therefore, Reagan sucked.” How does that make any sense? I think FDR was a FF as well, as was Obama, even though he’s ranked lower by Independent scholars than Reagan.

Because in my experience he did. So what more do you want? I can't stand the man and never have, even when he was elected when I was in 5th grade. He was president during my formative years and I always loathed him even though I was in the minority where I grew up.

I'm sick of hearing about Reagan and his f***d up policies. I have been thinking about how his rhetoric has led us to where we are the last few days. I don't think I'm alone in this sentiment either.

Of all the people responsible for the Catastrophe of Trump (especially these last few days), Reagan is the last one you want to blame. Don’t pin this on him just because he also had an “R” next to his name.

Reagan was by no means perfect, and I’m sure your families experiences are a reflection of at least some of his flaws. But I’ll never get over how he was able to put the nail in the coffin for the evil Communist Bloc.

Obama made choices that hurt me and the people I care about as well. But he still had a charm that made all but the most hateful Republicans smile.

The key is that nail in the coffin was the final nail of meny hammered in over the preceding 45 years. Republicans like to mythologize Reagan is some great Slayer of the great communist Beast, when all he did was run the ball in over the goal line after the rest of the team made a 95-yard drive before bringing him in.

Seriously, name one Reagan foreign policy venture which wasn't either already supported by 98 + percent of Democrats anyway ( e. G. The Grenada invasion, supporting the mujahideen in Afghanistan which started under Carter), or wasn't a colossal mistake which did nothing to advance our victory over communism (E.G. favoring so-called constructive engagement rather than sanctions with the apartheid South African government, our support of the Nicaraguan contras which was universally reviled by every democratic government in this hemisphere , and of course led to the Iran Contra debacle).

Conservatives like to claim that the fight checks Reagan wrote the Pentagon in the 80s somehow spent communist Russia to death and push them over the edge. Unfortunately that's not true. Military documents Declassified and obtained after the fall of the Cold War demonstrated that Soviet military spending did not increase particularly much for the ladies more than the rate of inflation. Reagan baited them to try matching the spending, but the Soviets didn't bite. Instead, we spend ourselves into enormous debt and created an unparalleled precedent for deficit spending, and in the process / social programs relied on by the poor and working class set defense contractors could make a bundle ( oh, and of course Finance huge tax cuts for the wealthiest).

It’s not just “conservatives” who think Reagan was a good president. Even Democrats rank him in the top 3rd.

And I also don’t think you understand just how evil the government of Nicaragua was at the time. Fighting them was necessary.

The non-conta opposition to the Sandinistas understood they were bad, and they adamantly and furiously opposed our supporting the Contras.

In answer to your question, not all that evil since they left on their own after being defeated in elections. Hell, even Trump couldn't do that! By your own rationale NATO shoumd be actively funding left wing paramilitaries in the US to figbt against Republican attempts to subvert Democracy here.

The more salient question is whether you realize just hiw evil the Contras were?

I can’t help but find it ironic that you condemn Reagan for providing support for a group trying to overthrow people who mass executed indigenous people- because you believe he played a role in the mass executions of indigenous people.

Your post makes zero sense. Elaborate?

My point is that Sandinistas were just as bad as the Contras.

Only, if they got in power, and Communism spread through Latin America, the Cold War may have ended VERY differently. Remember that.

Ah, the discredited domino theory. Your statement is at once both hyperbolic and fantastical. To say we needed to support a group of far right-wing bloodthirsty paramilitaries to remove a government which ultimately step down after losing a free election, let alone that it would have spread communism throughout Central America or even reverse the Cold War entirely, shows a breathtaking lack of basic historical knowledge.

The Domino Theory wasn't discredited, the Soviets had the goal of turning the whole world communist.

Also Eisenhower took many similar actions in Latin America as Reagan did, and in many ways Reagan's FP was a return to Eisenhower FP which until Reagan's was by far the most confrontational to the Soviets during the Cold War.

Yes, and the domino theory is of course why Iran is today communist. As is Honduras. And the Caribbean.

[Badger]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

On character, Reagan started his campaign outside Philadelphia, MS (site of the Mississippi Burning murders of civil rights activists) with a speech on states' rights. He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon. He failed to respond to the AIDS epidemic because his party was apathetic toward gay people (even if he wasn't personally homophobic). In retrospect we can peg him as a prejudiced man who inflamed situations when he should have been a leader.

Mississippi was a swing state in 1980 and the event he was speaking at was one of the top political fairs in Mississippi so of course he would speak there. Also actually read the states rights speech instead of just looking at one soundbite and you will see the only time he was referencing states rights came to economics in the speech not civil rights

" gosh fellas, the dog whistle was only a couple lines in the speech. I'm sure no one in the crowd noticed!"

He. Knew. Exactly. What. He. Was. Doing.

[OSR stands with Israel]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

On character, Reagan started his campaign outside Philadelphia, MS (site of the Mississippi Burning murders of civil rights activists) with a speech on states' rights. He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon. He failed to respond to the AIDS epidemic because his party was apathetic toward gay people (even if he wasn't personally homophobic). In retrospect we can peg him as a prejudiced man who inflamed situations when he should have been a leader.

Mississippi was a swing state in 1980 and the event he was speaking at was one of the top political fairs in Mississippi so of course he would speak there. Also actually read the states rights speech instead of just looking at one soundbite and you will see the only time he was referencing states rights came to economics in the speech not civil rights

" gosh fellas, the dog whistle was only a couple lines in the speech. I'm sure no one in the crowd noticed!"

He. Knew. Exactly. What. He. Was. Doing.

He said it one time and not about civil rights , but about economic policy where Reagan was perfectly correct.

[Badger]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon.

In summation: HP

You focus only on the bad while leaving out important context. Yes, Reagan said a racist thing once. He was born in 1911 and had his early childhood under a president who supported the KKK, and he held some of the prejudices of that time. If you’re calling every president who’s said something racist once a HP, then Washington, Lincoln, LBJ, and pretty much all presidents pre-Reagan were HP.

I judge people's values and deeds based on the time they lived in. There were plenty of people who were not bigots in the 1960s and 1980s, and people who had plenty of exposure to outside groups and still were bigoted are worse human beings. Reagan was an adult in control of his facilities when he chose to deliberately pander to racists for their votes. Other Republicans who had presidential ambitions chose not to, even though they were doubtless aware of previous Lily White strategies. Not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes makes a politician an HP.

You think the same of FDR?

He didn’t just make a racist comment once. He sent hundreds of thousands to an internet camp.

How’s that for “not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes”?

Yeah, I think FDR was a sh**tty guy, though an effective wartime leader and one of the best American presidents on economic policy. He sent parts of my family back to Europe to die, I'm not championing his character or actions. Pointing to another president is running from the question asked. The question is if Reagan was a Freedom Fighter or a Horrible Person. He was an HP.

And dismissing eight years of giving voice and legitimacy to racists to act like it was just a few comments is why Republicans are not going to win back people of decency.

I would argue that Reagan set of a better economic boom than FDR did, and would argue 1983-2001 was when we were at our peak not 1946-1963. The neoliberal consensus set out by Reagan did a lot of good and yes eventually it broke down but so did the post-war consensus as not everything can last forever and not everything is positive.


Bill Clinton mostly followed this economic consensus with deregulation, expansion of the type of free trade Reagan first proposed, welfare reform, capital gains tax cuts showing how influential Reagan was as a Democratic President economic policies turned out to be more similar to Reagan's than even the Rockefeller Republicans of the 1960s were let alone the Democrats of that era

Of course you would give Reagan credit for everything positive that occurred from 1983 on for the following several decades, writing up to and including rainbows and nice weather.

Bill Clinton raised upper income taxes, remember? And the reaganites of your party, that is every single one of them, decried how this would utterly destroy the economy and vibrant gross started by Clinton. Remember that also? And then, we had at the strongest. Of post-war growth ever during the next several years under Clinton's watch. Any of this ringing a bell?

[OSR stands with Israel]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon.

In summation: HP

You focus only on the bad while leaving out important context. Yes, Reagan said a racist thing once. He was born in 1911 and had his early childhood under a president who supported the KKK, and he held some of the prejudices of that time. If you’re calling every president who’s said something racist once a HP, then Washington, Lincoln, LBJ, and pretty much all presidents pre-Reagan were HP.

I judge people's values and deeds based on the time they lived in. There were plenty of people who were not bigots in the 1960s and 1980s, and people who had plenty of exposure to outside groups and still were bigoted are worse human beings. Reagan was an adult in control of his facilities when he chose to deliberately pander to racists for their votes. Other Republicans who had presidential ambitions chose not to, even though they were doubtless aware of previous Lily White strategies. Not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes makes a politician an HP.

You think the same of FDR?

He didn’t just make a racist comment once. He sent hundreds of thousands to an internet camp.

How’s that for “not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes”?

Yeah, I think FDR was a sh**tty guy, though an effective wartime leader and one of the best American presidents on economic policy. He sent parts of my family back to Europe to die, I'm not championing his character or actions. Pointing to another president is running from the question asked. The question is if Reagan was a Freedom Fighter or a Horrible Person. He was an HP.

And dismissing eight years of giving voice and legitimacy to racists to act like it was just a few comments is why Republicans are not going to win back people of decency.

I would argue that Reagan set of a better economic boom than FDR did, and would argue 1983-2001 was when we were at our peak not 1946-1963. The neoliberal consensus set out by Reagan did a lot of good and yes eventually it broke down but so did the post-war consensus as not everything can last forever and not everything is positive.


Bill Clinton mostly followed this economic consensus with deregulation, expansion of the type of free trade Reagan first proposed, welfare reform, capital gains tax cuts showing how influential Reagan was as a Democratic President economic policies turned out to be more similar to Reagan's than even the Rockefeller Republicans of the 1960s were let alone the Democrats of that era

Of course you would give Reagan credit for everything positive that occurred from 1983 on for the following several decades, writing up to and including rainbows and nice weather.

Bill Clinton raised upper income taxes, remember? And the reaganites of your party, that is every single one of them, decried how this would utterly destroy the economy and vibrant gross started by Clinton. Remember that also? And then, we had at the strongest. Of post-war growth ever during the next several years under Clinton's watch. Any of this ringing a bell?

1983-1991 was a huge boom too , and again yes Clinton broke Reaganite polciy some of the time but look at the rest : Welfare Reform, Deregulation, Capital Gain Tax Cuts, Reagan style Free Trade Agreements. 

Reagan also broke with his orthodoxy when he raised capital gains tax rates in 1986 so you can say he wasnt a real Reaganite either.


Just like people credit FDR for 1946-1963 as Eisenhower continued the vast majority of FDR's Policies, Clinton continued most of Reagan's policies and actually expanded upon them.

[SInNYC]

Reagan set the basis for Trump.

His disdain for science  ("trees pollute more than man") turned the party to one that doesnt accept science today. He also dismissed any real news sources, leading to today's dismissal of any unfavorable facts as fake news (though I blame big data, not Reagan, for the proliferation of true fake news).

His administration was a bunch of watergate retreads and was at the time one of the most corrupt. He also started the modern era of the imperial presidency.

On the issues, he certainly had a big impact. but it contributed to almost every problem of the last 20 years including 9/11, the great recession and rural economic wastelands. Here I have to blame Democrats, especially Bill Clinton, almost as much since Bush 41 (and in reality, Reagan's staff post-Alzheimer) had started to reverse some of Reagan's more extreme actions, but Clinton normalized them.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Yet another figure in the Republican Party's history that has helped corrupt it, distort it, pervert it and create the situation we are in now.

[freepcrusher]

Reagan gave voice to the worst type of conservatives. The Claremont/West Coast Straussian, Council for National Policy, Weyrich, Howard Phillips types were all lunatics before Reagan welcomed them into the fold.

[Benjamin Frank]

The first President I voted for and the best in my lifetime.

His 1980 tax cuts raided the SSA trust fund while giving huge tax cuts to millionaires. Iran Contra sold weapons to our enemies, he isn't Saint😭😭😭

No he isn't, but it speaks to the (lack of) quality of presidents in our lifetimes.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were vastly better Presidents than Ronald Reagan.

Of course, their generally positive Presidencies were undercut by their successors:  George W Bush and Donald Trump, easily the two worst Presidents since the start of the 20th Century.

[TheReckoning]

The first President I voted for and the best in my lifetime.

His 1980 tax cuts raided the SSA trust fund while giving huge tax cuts to millionaires. Iran Contra sold weapons to our enemies, he isn't Saint😭😭😭

No he isn't, but it speaks to the (lack of) quality of presidents in our lifetimes.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were vastly better Presidents than Ronald Reagan.

What makes you so confident in that assessment, given how most independent political scientists disagree?

[Badger]

A president can be an HP and still be a good president.

I don't think Reagan was an HP. But I also think he wasn't a great president. He is very much overrated and gets too much credit and not enough blame for the things that happened during (and right) after his time in office.

He’s overrated by Republicans, but the Democrats on this Thread are acting like he’s the reincarnation of Hitler.

He called African politicians monkeys in a leaked phone conversation with then President Nixon.

In summation: HP

You focus only on the bad while leaving out important context. Yes, Reagan said a racist thing once. He was born in 1911 and had his early childhood under a president who supported the KKK, and he held some of the prejudices of that time. If you’re calling every president who’s said something racist once a HP, then Washington, Lincoln, LBJ, and pretty much all presidents pre-Reagan were HP.

I judge people's values and deeds based on the time they lived in. There were plenty of people who were not bigots in the 1960s and 1980s, and people who had plenty of exposure to outside groups and still were bigoted are worse human beings. Reagan was an adult in control of his facilities when he chose to deliberately pander to racists for their votes. Other Republicans who had presidential ambitions chose not to, even though they were doubtless aware of previous Lily White strategies. Not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes makes a politician an HP.

You think the same of FDR?

He didn’t just make a racist comment once. He sent hundreds of thousands to an internet camp.

How’s that for “not valuing the humanity of some of your constituents more than votes”?

Yeah, I think FDR was a sh**tty guy, though an effective wartime leader and one of the best American presidents on economic policy. He sent parts of my family back to Europe to die, I'm not championing his character or actions. Pointing to another president is running from the question asked. The question is if Reagan was a Freedom Fighter or a Horrible Person. He was an HP.

And dismissing eight years of giving voice and legitimacy to racists to act like it was just a few comments is why Republicans are not going to win back people of decency.

I would argue that Reagan set of a better economic boom than FDR did, and would argue 1983-2001 was when we were at our peak not 1946-1963. The neoliberal consensus set out by Reagan did a lot of good and yes eventually it broke down but so did the post-war consensus as not everything can last forever and not everything is positive.


Bill Clinton mostly followed this economic consensus with deregulation, expansion of the type of free trade Reagan first proposed, welfare reform, capital gains tax cuts showing how influential Reagan was as a Democratic President economic policies turned out to be more similar to Reagan's than even the Rockefeller Republicans of the 1960s were let alone the Democrats of that era

Of course you would give Reagan credit for everything positive that occurred from 1983 on for the following several decades, writing up to and including rainbows and nice weather.

Bill Clinton raised upper income taxes, remember? And the reaganites of your party, that is every single one of them, decried how this would utterly destroy the economy and vibrant gross started by Clinton. Remember that also? And then, we had at the strongest. Of post-war growth ever during the next several years under Clinton's watch. Any of this ringing a bell?

1983-1991 was a huge boom too , and again yes Clinton broke Reaganite polciy some of the time but look at the rest : Welfare Reform, Deregulation, Capital Gain Tax Cuts, Reagan style Free Trade Agreements.  

Reagan also broke with his orthodoxy when he raised capital gains tax rates in 1986 so you can say he wasnt a real Reaganite either.


Just like people credit FDR for 1946-1963 as Eisenhower continued the vast majority of FDR's Policies, Clinton continued most of Reagan's policies and actually expanded upon them.

Who the hell credits FDR for the economic boom of the 50s and early 60s?

Just because engaged in some limited triangulation with the Republicans, to call his presidency a continuation of the hard-right economic and social policies of Reagan is a self-serving falsehood.

[TheReckoning]

Yes, and the domino theory is of course why Iran is today communist. As is Honduras. And the
Caribbean.

I’m not saying Domino Theory is 100% true, but what makes you so confident that those places wouldn’t be communist if Reagan hadn’t had contributed to the stop of the spread of Communism in there respective regions?

[Badger]

Yes, and the domino theory is of course why Iran is today communist. As is Honduras. And the
Caribbean.

I’m not saying Domino Theory is 100% true, but what makes you so confident that those places wouldn’t be communist if Reagan hadn’t had contributed to the stop of the spread of Communism in there respective regions?

My time travel experiment to an alternative timeline was very informative.

[TheReckoning]

Utter garbage President and person who wrecked the working and middle class with the de-regulations and huge tax cuts that in a way caused the great recession of 2008 and the ever growing wealth gap.

Have you considered that recessions aren’t caused by polices passed 25 years prior?

[Benjamin Frank]

The first President I voted for and the best in my lifetime.

His 1980 tax cuts raided the SSA trust fund while giving huge tax cuts to millionaires. Iran Contra sold weapons to our enemies, he isn't Saint😭😭😭

No he isn't, but it speaks to the (lack of) quality of presidents in our lifetimes.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were vastly better Presidents than Ronald Reagan.

What makes you so confident in that assessment, given how most independent political scientists disagree?

Because I teach history and economics and I know of the same events they do.  I believe what is going on is the right wing political scientists and historians in these surveys deliberately vote Reagan as the best President ever (or, at lowest, third best) in order to put him higher up the rankings than he would be otherwise.

Other than that, I can understand also understand some of it.  After Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter, all men essentially defeated by their offices, there were, at least, arguments in academia that the office of the Presidency should be replaced in favor of the Swiss governing model.

Reagan did restore the idea of a 'strong Presidency' and he also did play a role in successfully addressing the two top issues of the day: inflation/stagflation and the Cold War.

Gorbachev deserves the credit for ending the Cold War and Reagan's brinksmanship with the Soviet Union could have ended in a much different way, but Reagan deserves the credit for recognizing that Gorbachev was genuine.  In this, Reagan had to marginalize his own cold war hawks like Richard Perle.

Beyond that though, I invite you to try to argue that Reagan's Presidency was not 'short term gain for long term pain.'

However, because of these two major accomplishments, this is why I put Ronald Reagan as the 10th best President since 1901, out of the 20 Presidents.

[TheReckoning]

Yes, and the domino theory is of course why Iran is today communist. As is Honduras. And the
Caribbean.

I’m not saying Domino Theory is 100% true, but what makes you so confident that those places wouldn’t be communist if Reagan hadn’t had contributed to the stop of the spread of Communism in there respective regions?

My time travel experiment to an alternative timeline was very informative.

So you’re admitting you have no idea?

Partisan hackery like this is why America is going nowhere. You believing you know better than 99% of political scientists is no better than Republicans who do the same to Obama (well, maybe a little bit, because I can’t ignore the racism in my party).