The GOP does need to shut up about Ronald Reagan!

[TheDarkCap]

I mean really.... you don't see the Democrats saying FDR this. FDR that. or JFK this and JFK that.

Every time a Republican talks on TV it's Ronald Reagan this and Ronald Reagan that.

Do they not know that that was a different time? That he's dead and gone now?
A lot of people today wasn't even born when he was around?

Why don't they talk about what "they" want to do, instead of looking back to the past?
They need to move on!

Besides the economy wasn't really that great under Ronald Reagan! I think that's part of what's wrong with this party. It's all the time....Oh Ronald Reagan, if we could just be like Ronald Reagan he was our God.

So what do you guys think? Do you at least agree with me on this?

And just on a side note I was happy to see that Mitt Romney out performed Ronald Reagan (1984) in five states: Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, and West Virginia.

[nycguydowntown]

If they don't have him they have absolutely nothing. You want them to talk about W or Richard Nixon?

[frankfrank]

Besides forever yammering about the greatness of Reagan, they need to STFU about Abraham Lincoln as well.

[Kulindahr]

No, they should just man up and be like Reagan on the topic they hate: the deficit. Reagan raised taxes more than once, and his lowest rate was far higher than what we have today. If they'd follow that example of fiscal sense, weak as it admittedly is, I'll let them talk all they want.

[GiancarloC]

Didn't Reagan win the same percentage of the white male vote as Romney did? Didn't serve Romney too well did it? Reagan ran up horrible deficits and left this country in economic trouble. Bush Sr left it a mess too. Clinton had to go in there and clean up the mess. Why is it democrats always clean up after republicans and then get blamed?

Reagan also gave an amnesty for immigrants... but don't ask any republican to talk about that.

[T-Rexx]

Ronald Reagan is much beloved by Republicans for creating the modern Republican Party. Although Reagan was not really personally responsible for a great deal of what happened during his administration, much of what Republicanism is today was started during his administration. Republicans feel obligated to praise Reagan because, if what Reagan did was wrong, then the modern Republican Party is wrong. And, frankly, it is a lot easier to praise Reagan as a demigod than it is to change party ideology and admit mistakes.

Prior to Reagan, the Republican Party was largely two things: a party of somewhat conservative economic ideals and an anti-civil rights organization. The Reagan administration transformed Republicanism into the party of fundamentalist Christianity. They transformed it into an anti-environmental movement (which was somewhat paradoxical, since the previous Republican president had created the EPA). They morphed conservative economic ideals into advocacy only for the financial interests of the very, very rich. They championed the anti-union movement. They started the anti-intellectualism and the rejection of science and reason by the party. They began the practice of fashioning alternate realities that supported party doctrine, as well of the practice of creating their own "experts" and pseudo-science to support their alternate realities. They began the now-familiar Republican practice of massive government expansion while borrowing beyond all comprehension.

Quite a lot of what the Republican Party is today began during the Reagan administration. So many of the problems the party suffers from now started with Reagan. I think the day will come when Republicans will look back on Reagan, not with fondness for having forged a lasting idealism (like FDR), but with regret for having chosen a wrong and and harmful path.

That's when the GOP will shut up about Reagan.

[loki81]

hyping up Reagan is probably more akin to Democrats talking about the Clinton economy (and conveniently ignoring the dot-com crash)

[GiancarloC]

hyping up Reagan is probably more akin to Democrats talking about the Clinton economy (and conveniently ignoring the dot-com crash)

Not really. That's not alike at all.

[loki81]

Not really. That's not alike at all.

fair enough, I apologize. there's absolutely nothing alike about democrats and republicans both idealizing their last successful presidencies (ignoring Obama, since his is in-progress)

[GiancarloC]

fair enough, I apologize. there's absolutely nothing alike about democrats and republicans both idealizing their last successful presidencies (ignoring Obama, since his is in-progress)

The praising of Clinton has reasoning. But as far as the dot com bust, I didn't realize the President controlled the actions of the private sector. Is Obama to blame for the real estate crash?

[ReadyWithReadyWit]

fair enough, I apologize. there's absolutely nothing alike about democrats and republicans both idealizing their last successful presidencies (ignoring Obama, since his is in-progress)

C'mon, Loki... Clinton good, Reagan bad... get with the program...

The praising of Clinton has reasoning. But as far as the dot com bust, I didn't realize the President controlled the actions of the private sector. Is Obama to blame for the real estate crash?

Not to play Devil's Advocate, but what the hell are we praising Clinton for exactly if the president doesn't influence the actions of the private sector?

[GiancarloC]

Not to play Devil's Advocate, but what the hell are we praising Clinton for exactly if the president doesn't influence the actions of the private sector?

He was a pretty good President. He made his mistakes. I don't really know any democrats that idolize him. He kinda drew some ire during the 2008 Election...

Reagan was bad on so many multiple levels... including a complete failure to respond to the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and stacking up deficits... Clinton reversed that...

[Ninja108]

Tricke down economics another legacy of Reagan as well.

[MikeyLove]

Abraham Lincoln would be very ashamed of the Republican Party today...He would absolutely rebuke his own Party.

[bw92116]

Exactly. Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt are the only 2 Republicans I have any admiration for. And I think both would simply laugh at what the Republican Party has become today. As for Reagan, they don't like to admit that he was originally a Democrat, but when he lost the nomination for Governor of California, the Republicans offered him the nomination - but he had to switch parties. So he was not exactly a pure Republican. They hold him up as their patron saint, but in my opinion being President was his last acting job and no more. The policies introduced by him (the infamous Reaganomics or "trickle-down economics") were disastrous for America and were the beginning of the destruction of the middle class in America. He cut tax rates, increased defense spending, and promised to do it without increasing the national debt - yet the national debt nearly tripled during his presidency. Insanely, the Republicans of today want to do the same things... cut taxes yet again and increase defense spending yet again. That's their only solution for anything. They need to figure out some other plan.

[Kulindahr]

Exactly. Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt are the only 2 Republicans I have any admiration for. And I think both would simply laugh at what the Republican Party has become today. As for Reagan, they don't like to admit that he was originally a Democrat, but when he lost the nomination for Governor of California, the Republicans offered him the nomination - but he had to switch parties. So he was not exactly a pure Republican. They hold him up as their patron saint, but in my opinion being President was his last acting job and no more. The policies introduced by him (the infamous Reaganomics or "trickle-down economics") were disastrous for America and were the beginning of the destruction of the middle class in America. He cut tax rates, increased defense spending, and promised to do it without increasing the national debt - yet the national debt nearly tripled during his presidency. Insanely, the Republicans of today want to do the same things... cut taxes yet again and increase defense spending yet again. That's their only solution for anything. They need to figure out some other plan.

You should add Eisenhower, who understood that when there's debt you tax those who can afford it, and that equality meant desegregation, both in the armed forces and the schools.

[star-warrior]

President Obama said you need to raise taxes on the wealthy, and alluded to the Clinton Administration.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20275799

He really missed the opportunity at that juncture to point out that Ronald Reagan raised taxes during his administration too.

[maxpowr9]

I think I am the only "economist" here but if we ever return the Laffer Curve [the foundation for Reaganomics for those not aware], I'll off myself. It's been rebuked repeatedly and I am just glad I had a neo-classical professor teach me macro so I learned all the nonsensical theorems (and there are crap tons of them) to back up their ideas. If you ever want to understand why the theories are all shit, just read their assumptions on why that particular premise works.

[GiancarloC]

I heard a quote recently... can't recall from where... Mitt Romney campaigned as if it was 1980 using Ronald Reagan's campaign approach... he won whites by a similar margin and was expecting a sort of moral crusade. Difference was obvious though. Reagan won in a landslide, but Romney lost by over 2.3 million votes and by a significant margin in the electoral college. Changing demographics. The 1980s were a time of the Christian Right emergingg. 2012 was a time in which three states legalized same sex marriage honestly even catching me off guard... I still can't believe what happened.

At any rate, republicans still act is if it were the 1980 Elections. It seems to me they are stuck in this feeling of nostalgia of their cherished decade that proved total shit for most of this country (especially the gay community).

[Kulindahr]

President Obama said you need to raise taxes on the wealthy, and alluded to the Clinton Administration.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20275799

He really missed the opportunity at that juncture to point out that Ronald Reagan raised taxes during his administration too.

Wow -- big fail.

With just a little effort, Obama should be able to turn the tables on the Republicans and make the case to the American people that they're the ones keeping the deficit high, by opposing good solid Republican common sense as shown by Reagan. If he'd done that during the election, I think we'd be looking at a House in a virtual tie at this point.

[Kulindahr]

I think I am the only "economist" here but if we ever return the Laffer Curve [the foundation for Reaganomics for those not aware], I'll off myself. It's been rebuked repeatedly and I am just glad I had a neo-classical professor teach me macro so I learned all the nonsensical theorems (and there are crap tons of them) to back up their ideas. If you ever want to understand why the theories are all shit, just read their assumptions on why that particular premise works.

The Laffer Curve premise is actually valid (i.e. it actually works), but just for a very narrow set of circumstances involving things from the existing tax rates to the amount of unused industrial capacity to the unemployment rate to the education level of those unemployed to....

The problem with the Laffer curve is like that of the guy with a snow shovel who happened to scoop up a shovelfull off a spot where a steam pipe goes under the sidewalk, and concluded that shoveling is faster than using a snowplow.

[guyfromNY]

Reagan pretty much ignored the AIDS crisis and waited for years to address it in public. Meanwhile, people were dying left and right and the whole thing was dismissed as a gay disease...sad.

[chance1]

Pretty sure that BO put RR on the list of politicians he most admires

Certain

Ooops

[Lostlover]

-

I think I am the only "economist" here but if we ever return the Laffer Curve [the foundation for Reaganomics for those not aware], I'll off myself. It's been rebuked repeatedly and I am just glad I had a neo-classical professor teach me macro so I learned all the nonsensical theorems (and there are crap tons of them) to back up their ideas. If you ever want to understand why the theories are all shit, just read their assumptions on why that particular premise works.

The irony about the Republican's love affair with the Laffer Curve is that it was created by a 7th century Islamist. The more things chance...

[GiancarloC]

Chance, I don't think he really does.

[bike10]

Reagan spent 8 years playing the role of a president.

[Kulindahr]

Pretty sure that BO put RR on the list of politicians he most admires

Certain

Ooops

True, but there's a difference between admiration and compulsive obsession.