Reagan vs. Romney

Like the FDR vs. Obama thread I’m pitting the current candidates with the general hero of the American conservatives and liberals.

Since “they both suck ass” was not an option, I did not vote.

How many of these are you going to put out? Why not list all of them at the same time and be done with it?

Just these two.

Romney. He won’t develop a cult following, so his disastrous policies will have a more limited effect.

Upon some thought, this. Both are scum, but Reagan is more dangerous scum.

Romney beacause he is ineffective and thus would not be able to push through his agenda. Reagan was able to do a lot of harm in his 8 years.

Liberals? Neo-classical liberals, for whom wage labour and mandatory public prayer is tolerable.

Who supports the latter? And as far as I can see everybody who isn’t a Marxist or something supports wage labour.

Reagan is about 100 times more liberal than the republican party today, or how Mitt Romney is promising to be when he becomes president.

Reagan, because he’s dead, [del]a[/del] the quality I find to be endearing in Republican presidents.

I want to change my answer to kaylasdad99’s. If it can be dead Reagan then not only do I support it, I’m willing to change the name of National Airport to Dead Reagan National Airport.

Wow, this group is incredible, not just in this thread, but perhaps the majority of Dopers (from my brief time here, so far). Is there anyone else out there who appreciated Ronald Reagan?

(now, watch, we’ll likely get a lot of smart-ass comments)

Anyway, Reagan. Clearly Reagan.

In the 1970s, the USA was weak, people were not proud to be American, the economy was in a shambles, the USSR was a constant threat. Reagan fixed so many things. Was he perfect? Far from it, he made mistakes. But he left the Presidency with the country so much better off than when he entered.

What these Reagan Naysayers don’t realize is that history has already judged Reagan to be among the greatest of the presidents, ever. So, naysayers may continue to bash him but they’re clearly in the world minority, though they may enjoy a small-town, local majority here on SDMB.

And I thought SDMB was about fighting ignorance. Silly people.

Can you provide some specifics on the Soviet threat to the US? Also, you do realize that Reagan pursued essentially the same policies as every president since Truman in regards to the USSR? The basic framework for the policy was drafted by George Kennan in the famous Long Telegram of 1948.

I think any evaluation of Reagan’s legacy has to look at his record on terrorism: not only did he admit to trading arms for hostages; he also pulled out of Lebannon after the USMC barracks bombing. Osama bin Laden specifically mentioned the Lebannon pullout as the moment he realized that the US was a “paper tiger” (his words) and that they were vulnerable to further terrorist attacks. Also, the Reagan administration is partyly responsible for destabilizing the northern rim of Pakistan through its ill-advised arming of the Afghan resistance without sufficient attention paid to post-Soviet occupied Afghanistan (he won the war, but lost the peace).

On the domestic side, he pit Americans against each other with not so sublte racist messaging (welfare queens) to the advantage of the Republican Party and the disadvantage of the country. He also ushered in our era of out of controlled spending with the tax cut and spend policies that have become the hallmark of the moderne Republican Party and have lead to our current economic woes (remember it was Clinton who created a budget surplus). Last but not least, he pointlessly invaded Grenada for his own short term political gains, which was aped on a much grander scale by W. Bush in Iraq.

Other than that, Reagan was great.

He made two and I made two, it’s hardly flooding the forum

Reagan.

[Snip]

When did history do this?

The quotes on those issues imply that they were little more than gimmicks which Reagan halfhearted about. And Jefferson was a bit naive economically-he thought America would be a nation of small farmers rather than an industrialized country.

Absolutely incorrect.

Jefferson argued that America should be a nation of farmers, not that it would be one.

[

](http://www.learnnc.org/lp/editions/nchist-newnation/4478)

(bolding mine)

There is a huge difference between writing about what you wish would happen and what you think will happen. Jefferson clearly saw a fork coming in the road, and was writing about what course he wished the new country would take, not writing predictively about what course he thought it would take. The tipoff is all the moralizing; one doesn’t really have to argue in favor of events that are inevitably going to happen, and offer arguments and reasons for others to support your ideas.

I voted for Gov. Romney. I started university after Pres. Reagan was elected and while I wasn’t weak and I felt pretty good about being an American, I do recall how bad Pres. Reagan was then. My vote for Gov. Romney in this poll reflects the fact that I know very little about what sort of President he would be.

That said, the metric used by kaylasdad99 does set the bar pretty high and has merit. :smiley: