Both administrations had economic booms. Both had scandals. So which did a greater good for this country?
I think we are better off right now than we were in '88. This is largely due to the fact that the budget is currently balanced. (Both the Dems and Reps want to claim credit for this, and they both should. Just as both should shoulder blame for the $2 Trillion dollars we overspent in the '80s).
The scandals are amusingly inverted. Clinton cheated on his wife, a reprehensible act but a private one. Reagan sold arms and military weapons to a hostile nation that had held Americans hostage for over a year in order to make money to give to terrorists/freedom fighters in Nicaragua (a direct violation of the law).
A hundred years from now in history classes, if you ask which one was impeached most will guess Reagan.
But that’s because the coverups and aftermaths are also inverted. Clinton lied. Sent others out to lie. Hid information. Finally, he admitted he did it, but refused to admit that he lied. Got upset, indignant and combative.
Reagan came out on the first day and said, “It’s my fault. I didn’t do anything, but it’s my fault that it happened.” He then swamped the press and Congress with information, so that by the time it was all digested and the holes examined everyone was tired of it. When accused of covering up, he said “I told you it was my fault, I gave you all that information, how can I be covering up?”
And the fundamental reason America got tired of Iran-Contra and didn’t tire of Lewinksy… no sex. The only thing remotely titillating was Fawn Hall smuggling documents out of the Pentagon in her bra.
I’m going to say Reagan was better for the country, based on conditions in 1980 and 1992. In '92 we were just coming out of a mid-level recession when the election took place, but we had also recently won the Gulf War, and things weren’t exactly bleak. I dunno if you guys are old enough to remember 1980 much, but I was 17–recession, high unemployment, high inflation, hostages in Iran, and Vietnam hangover…and the definite sense that we were losing the Cold War.
In '92 a lot of people were pissed off, but in '80 a lot of people actually thought the US was starting its swirl down the drain of history. Like Reagan’s policies or not, his administration pulled us out of that.
—>really? Perhaps I’m totally off here (damn liberal press?), but the impression I have is that 95% of what he said was “I don’t remember… I don’t remember… I don’t remember… I don’t remember… anyone who remembers what they did on July 8th 1985 raise your hand… I don’t remember…” and so on.
(And while we’re on the topic of scandal, let’s not forget James Watt, Anne Gorsuch and Edwin Meese, among others)
Good point. Sometimes it seems people just don’t get this.
Regarding MysterEcks’ point: did Reagan do more good because of the sorry state of the country when he took office? Or has Clinton’s administration started the country along a more prosperous path? Since he’s still in office, we don’t have the perspective that we can use with Reagan.
I’ve got to say Reagan did more good for this country. It was his insistence on SDI, maligned though it was, that freaked out the USSR enough to stop making Afghanistan-like invasions. It was his rock-solid anti-communism that created the climate that led to downfall of dictatorships in Eastern Europe. Closer to home, it was fear of Reagan retaliation that led the Iranians to release the hostages. It was his slashing of tax rates that got more money, once locked up in tax shelters (or taxes themselves!) pumped into the economy.
Gosh, which one will I pick?
I throw my vote behind Reagan, because his administration had to start from a much lower position, but is one of the chief reasons we are where we are today. Reagan also accomplished his most impressive feats with a Congress composed of a majority from the other side of the aisle.
Meanwhile, Clinton has had the benefit of a relatively boring foreign situation (compared to Communism), hasn’t accomplished much greatness in terms of long-standing policy (which is partially opinion since not nearly enough time has passed to judge long-term. But I do feel pretty comfortable in saying that), has been a large part of the reason the 2 sides of the aisle are as unlikely as ever to actually work together, and has helped create an even greater disillusionment in the political system than has existed during my lifetime (which started post-Watergate.)
Um…wasn’t this already posted in Great Debates?
I am recalling a presidential statement shortly after the first revelations. Reagan sat in the Oval Office and told America something to the effect of “As President, I have many aides and advisors who do work for me. It has come to light that some of these advisors have overstepped their authority. But, as Harry Truman said, ‘The Buck Stops Here’. The ultimate responsibility for what happens in the Executive Branch rests with me.”
It was later that he had all the selective amnesia to separate himself from the actual committing of the deed. But up front he accepted responsibility for it happening “On my watch.” I think that was part of why he stayed in America’s good graces despite the facts, that and the lack of sex in the scandal.
Actually, I can’t imagine anyone wanting to have sex with Reagan (or Clinton, for that matter). I mean…EEEEW!!!
Yes; the exact thread. I thought dupe threads were a no-no?
Nice catch, you two! 
Locking up now.