Opinion of Democrats with a positive opinion of Ronald Reagan

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

There are a few of them. Are they FF or in the wrong party?

[Meursault]

They tend to be horrible even for ostensibly 'Democratic' reasons: Irish or Italian ethnic collectivists with a hard on for reactionary unions like the Teamsters. All these traits are perfectly Democratic - and perfectly abominable.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Burn them all!

[Phony Moderate]

Horrible, but given that the Democrats have adopted and extended many Reaganite polices, it shouldn't be surprising that such people exist.

[dead0man]

I don't know if they are FF or HP with what little information we have, but they are certainly more open minded than the ones that think Chavez is a better person than him.

[Goldwater]

Well, it depends. This category could range from hawkish Democrats, to Blue Dog Democrats, to outright Dixiecrats.

[TNF]

They tend to be horrible even for ostensibly 'Democratic' reasons: Irish or Italian ethnic collectivists with a hard on for reactionary unions like the Teamsters. All these traits are perfectly Democratic - and perfectly abominable.

In the IBT's defense, it at least realized that backing Reagan in '80 was a bad idea the minute after it did so, and hasn't endorsed a Republican since. (Of course the Democrats aren't much better, but yeah, the IBT endorsed Nixon and Reagan, so...)

Anyway, it's perfectly logical for Democrats to have a positive opinion of Ronald Reagan, given that they're the real heirs to the policies he promoted, be they privatization (Obama's trying to gut the TVA after all), lowering the overall tax burden we impose upon the rich (perhaps not in terms of outright income taxation but in terms of actual taxation, that is, Capital Gains Taxation), sending American troops to any number of foreign lands at the behest of corporate capital, and sabber-rattling with Russia.

[Incipimus iterum]

I't depends but many democrats have there reasons for having a positive opinion of him

[Sopranos Republican]

F***ing heretics.

[7,052,770]

Reagan would probably be a Democrat if he were alive and of sound mind today, so there's that...

[AggregateDemand]

True progressives who appreciate the nuance of neoliberal politics, rather than pining for regressive Depression Era political policy.

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

True progressives who appreciate the nuance of neoliberal politics, rather than pining for regressive Depression Era political policy.

lol

[Consciously Unconscious]

Sane

[Goldwater]

Reagan would probably be a Democrat if he were alive and of sound mind today, so there's that...

*citation needed*

[Maxwell]

Reagan would probably be a Democrat if he were alive and of sound mind today, so there's that...

*citation needed*

I mean, he lowered rates to below what they are today, so on the tax issue ALONE that post is just false.

[7,052,770]

Reagan would probably be a Democrat if he were alive and of sound mind today, so there's that...

*citation needed*

I mean, he lowered rates to below what they are today, so on the tax issue ALONE that post is just false.

I was probably hyperbolizing, but Reagan definitely couldn't win a GOP primary anywhere these days:

He wouldn't be a Republican at all. He doesn't meet the litmus test:

• Gave all "illegal immigrants" amnesty
• Ran up huge deficits
• Didn't really care about abortion until he had to near the end of his presidency
• More pro-gay in the 1970s than most Republicans are in 2014 (torpedoed the ban of gay teachers in public schools, which most Republican states would probably pass today)
• Made peace with our biggest enemy
• Set tax rates in the 30s when he could have gotten them lower

This list could go on and on. The guy couldn't win a Republican primary anywhere. It's a shame that he lost his mind and then died, because he really could have steered the Republican Party in a saner direction.

Why the Tea Party fanatics run their campaigns today on "I'm a Reagan Republican!!!!1" makes no sense. Either they are completely ignorant of history or think everyone else is.

[IceSpear]

They tend to be horrible even for ostensibly 'Democratic' reasons: Irish or Italian ethnic collectivists with a hard on for reactionary unions like the Teamsters. All these traits are perfectly Democratic - and perfectly abominable.

In the IBT's defense, it at least realized that backing Reagan in '80 was a bad idea the minute after it did so, and hasn't endorsed a Republican since. (Of course the Democrats aren't much better, but yeah, the IBT endorsed Nixon and Reagan, so...)

Anyway, it's perfectly logical for Democrats to have a positive opinion of Ronald Reagan, given that they're the real heirs to the policies he promoted, be they privatization (Obama's trying to gut the TVA after all), lowering the overall tax burden we impose upon the rich (perhaps not in terms of outright income taxation but in terms of actual taxation, that is, Capital Gains Taxation), sending American troops to any number of foreign lands at the behest of corporate capital, and sabber-rattling with Russia.

Apparently the unions see the Democrats as better, since they keep endorsing them.

[TNF]

They tend to be horrible even for ostensibly 'Democratic' reasons: Irish or Italian ethnic collectivists with a hard on for reactionary unions like the Teamsters. All these traits are perfectly Democratic - and perfectly abominable.

In the IBT's defense, it at least realized that backing Reagan in '80 was a bad idea the minute after it did so, and hasn't endorsed a Republican since. (Of course the Democrats aren't much better, but yeah, the IBT endorsed Nixon and Reagan, so...)

Anyway, it's perfectly logical for Democrats to have a positive opinion of Ronald Reagan, given that they're the real heirs to the policies he promoted, be they privatization (Obama's trying to gut the TVA after all), lowering the overall tax burden we impose upon the rich (perhaps not in terms of outright income taxation but in terms of actual taxation, that is, Capital Gains Taxation), sending American troops to any number of foreign lands at the behest of corporate capital, and sabber-rattling with Russia.

Apparently the unions see the Democrats as better, since they keep endorsing them.

The relationship between the Democratic Party and organized labor is that of an abusive husband (the Democrats) and a battered wife (labor). The bureaucrats directing the labor movement are clinging to the Democrats for want of remaining relevant, but there's no indication that, if offered the choice, the rank-and-file wouldn't ditch the party for something bigger and better, if such an option existed, that is.

[IceSpear]

They tend to be horrible even for ostensibly 'Democratic' reasons: Irish or Italian ethnic collectivists with a hard on for reactionary unions like the Teamsters. All these traits are perfectly Democratic - and perfectly abominable.

In the IBT's defense, it at least realized that backing Reagan in '80 was a bad idea the minute after it did so, and hasn't endorsed a Republican since. (Of course the Democrats aren't much better, but yeah, the IBT endorsed Nixon and Reagan, so...)

Anyway, it's perfectly logical for Democrats to have a positive opinion of Ronald Reagan, given that they're the real heirs to the policies he promoted, be they privatization (Obama's trying to gut the TVA after all), lowering the overall tax burden we impose upon the rich (perhaps not in terms of outright income taxation but in terms of actual taxation, that is, Capital Gains Taxation), sending American troops to any number of foreign lands at the behest of corporate capital, and sabber-rattling with Russia.

Apparently the unions see the Democrats as better, since they keep endorsing them.

The relationship between the Democratic Party and organized labor is that of an abusive husband (the Democrats) and a battered wife (labor). The bureaucrats directing the labor movement are clinging to the Democrats for want of remaining relevant, but there's no indication that, if offered the choice, the rank-and-file wouldn't ditch the party for something bigger and better, if such an option existed, that is.

Well, I can see why they'd choose the abusive husband over the homicidal husband.

[Meursault]

The problem is that, sans the IWW, the American unions are all worthless.

[TNF]

The problem is that, sans the IWW, the American unions are all worthless.

I don't think I fully agree with that sentiment. There are plenty of good, class struggle-oriented unions that are doing a lot of good work. The Chicago Teachers' Union, the International Longshoreman and Warehouse Union, and the school bus drivers' union immediately spring to mind. But I do understand where you're coming from; the problem is that years of pummeling have pushed much of organized labor firmly into Gompersism, which is a path straight into irrelevancy. The only thing that will save American labor unions is an upsurge in radical left-wing activism (that is, actual left-wing activism, not this liberal stuff about privilege and whatnot) like we saw in the 1930s.

[Meursault]

The AFL-CIO ought to be forcibly dissolved. Its collaboration with the CIA during the Cold War - establishing international "labor unions" to undermine socialist ones - is unforgivable.

[Mr. Illini]

There aren't as many of them as the righties like to make out. They all are voting Republican now anyway because they were all white southern Democrats, which don't exist anymore.

[Miles]

There aren't as many of them as the righties like to make out. They all are voting Republican now anyway because they were all white southern Democrats, which don't exist anymore.

*cough, cough*

[Mr. Illini]

There aren't as many of them as the righties like to make out. They all are voting Republican now anyway because they were all white southern Democrats, which don't exist anymore.

*cough, cough*

*in large numbers