Reaganites are RINOs

[buckeye45_73]

I have noticed the Republicans call them that. However, at the same time, defend that goober through thick and thin.
Why?

I think that you are overstating the case, quit a bit,


BUT, another point is that times have changed. A couple of examples.


1. Being a strong anti-communist is less central now.

2. Free Trade was a policy that made a lot of sense then. Now, it, at least as it has been practiced, is obviously an utter failure.

3. Immigration was a very different situation then. A reasonable person could reasonable expect things to work out without much fuss. Now only the deeply deluded could think that.


Just off the top of my head. I'm sure there is more, that will come up.

I just cant buy what ifs. You have no idea if his beliefs would be different or not.
The fact is, if reagan was POTUS today, he would either be a D or be slammed by the repubs for being a RINO

no I disagree bigtime with that assessment. In the 80s you had the Reagan faction and the Bush/establishment faction. The RINOS are the Bush/establishment faction. Reagan liked to tangle, he would compromise but he wouldn't go down without a fight.
As for policy-
1) tax Cuts, he would approve and di so himself to great success
2)Amnesty- he tried it, it failed badly, I'm sure he'd be close to the build a wall/security first position that conservatives have today
3)free trade, we were all for it, until we found out it wasn't free trade. For example, the idea was we open our markets, and pick a country opens theirs, but that's not how it happened so it was a disaster, I doubt he'd redo that
4)Regulation reform, I think he'd like the Trump policy of remove 2 regs for each new one
5)repealing Obamacare, He would definitely be for that
6)Strong Military...and will go to war when necessary...but try to avoid it

So the idea is the establishmet were the Bush faction:
1) that didn't like tax cuts
2)wants amnesty...AGAIN (insanity as they say)
3)wants more free trade(aka one sided trade to our detriment)
4)I think they're for regulation reform, but you never know
5)Say they're for Obamacare repeal, but never quite get the right bill to vote for...hmmm
6)Strong military...but loves war a little too much


The only area would be foreign policy, since Reagan was in the middle of the cold war, it's hard to see where he would go, but I think he didn't like the UN much, loved Israel and that's about all I can say on foreing policy

But in the end, I think he would love the Trump agenda and he might not like all the tweets, he'd like the fighting spirit.

You are assuming the actions of a dead man. Fallacy central.

Not really, knowing his positions....I mean sure he's dead, so if you're taking that position why pose the question?

 

[TNHarley]

I have noticed the Republicans call them that. However, at the same time, defend that goober through thick and thin.
Why?

I think that you are overstating the case, quit a bit,


BUT, another point is that times have changed. A couple of examples.


1. Being a strong anti-communist is less central now.

2. Free Trade was a policy that made a lot of sense then. Now, it, at least as it has been practiced, is obviously an utter failure.

3. Immigration was a very different situation then. A reasonable person could reasonable expect things to work out without much fuss. Now only the deeply deluded could think that.


Just off the top of my head. I'm sure there is more, that will come up.

I just cant buy what ifs. You have no idea if his beliefs would be different or not.
The fact is, if reagan was POTUS today, he would either be a D or be slammed by the repubs for being a RINO

no I disagree bigtime with that assessment. In the 80s you had the Reagan faction and the Bush/establishment faction. The RINOS are the Bush/establishment faction. Reagan liked to tangle, he would compromise but he wouldn't go down without a fight.
As for policy-
1) tax Cuts, he would approve and di so himself to great success
2)Amnesty- he tried it, it failed badly, I'm sure he'd be close to the build a wall/security first position that conservatives have today
3)free trade, we were all for it, until we found out it wasn't free trade. For example, the idea was we open our markets, and pick a country opens theirs, but that's not how it happened so it was a disaster, I doubt he'd redo that
4)Regulation reform, I think he'd like the Trump policy of remove 2 regs for each new one
5)repealing Obamacare, He would definitely be for that
6)Strong Military...and will go to war when necessary...but try to avoid it

So the idea is the establishmet were the Bush faction:
1) that didn't like tax cuts
2)wants amnesty...AGAIN (insanity as they say)
3)wants more free trade(aka one sided trade to our detriment)
4)I think they're for regulation reform, but you never know
5)Say they're for Obamacare repeal, but never quite get the right bill to vote for...hmmm
6)Strong military...but loves war a little too much


The only area would be foreign policy, since Reagan was in the middle of the cold war, it's hard to see where he would go, but I think he didn't like the UN much, loved Israel and that's about all I can say on foreing policy

But in the end, I think he would love the Trump agenda and he might not like all the tweets, he'd like the fighting spirit.

You are assuming the actions of a dead man. Fallacy central.

Not really, knowing his positions....I mean sure he's dead, so if you're taking that position why pose the question?

I know his positions too. You know, his ACTUAL action.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Let's look at where Reagan falls on the Political Compass:

Compare it with others:

Based on these compass charts, Ronald Reagan was Barrack Hussain Obama or Hillary Clinton. Way too much of an authoritarian skew for my tastes.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Found a better one:

This one appears to be more accurate. I am nearly dead center of the lower right quadrant, just right of Thomas Jefferson and directly below Milton Friedman, so I think this one is the most accurate. Still, Reagan was WAY too authoritarian for my liking. If a candidate/politician is not on or below the center line, fuck them.

 

[TNHarley]

Found a better one:

This one appears to be more accurate. I am nearly dead center of the lower right quadrant, just right of Thomas Jefferson and directly below Milton Friedman, so I think this one is the most accurate. Still WAY too authoritarian for my liking. If a candidate/politician is not on or below the center line, fuck them.

IIRC i am around 4 squares down slap in the middle.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Found a better one:

This one appears to be more accurate. I am nearly dead center of the lower right quadrant, just right of Thomas Jefferson and directly below Milton Friedman, so I think this one is the most accurate. Still WAY too authoritarian for my liking. If a candidate/politician is not on or below the center line, fuck them.

IIRC i am around4 squares down slap in the middle.

You correspond with the greatest economic mind of the 20th Century (Milton Friedman). You've got my vote.

 

[TNHarley]

Found a better one:

This one appears to be more accurate. I am nearly dead center of the lower right quadrant, just right of Thomas Jefferson and directly below Milton Friedman, so I think this one is the most accurate. Still WAY too authoritarian for my liking. If a candidate/politician is not on or below the center line, fuck them.

IIRC i am around4 squares down slap in the middle.

You correspond with the greatest economic mind of the 20th Century (Milton Friedman). You've got my vote.

if you voted for me, you would get tired of winning

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

This one is interesting.

During the Primaries:

Trump and the GOP clowns in the primary campaigned like a bunch of anal-probe nazis.

Then, Trump moved slightly left but still maintained his authoritarian nazi posture, while Hillary moved slightly right.

NEITHER changed their position on the up or down scale.

Americans are too focused on left and right and not focused enough on the real issues--authoritarian v. libertarian. They are all stuck in that top right quadrant with GOP politicians being more authoritarian.


Does anyone have a political compass for Coolidge?

This may help:

Comparing the Political Ideology of Presidents - Fact / Myth

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

• Clevelandian (a libertarian without the social conservative aspects, a staunch classical liberal focused on business interests, not social issues like race; Lincoln went toward social liberalism, the ex-confederates toward social conservatism, but this group focused on industrialization in the Gilded Age and “small government” after): Rutherford B. Hayes (1877-1881), James A. Garfield (1881), Chester Arthur (1881-1885), Grover Cleveland (1885-1889), William McKinley (1897-1901), Warren G. Harding (1921-1923), Calvin Coolidge (1923-1929)

 

[TNHarley]

• Clevelandian (a libertarian without the social conservative aspects, a staunch classical liberal focused on business interests, not social issues like race; Lincoln went toward social liberalism, the ex-confederates toward social conservatism, but this group focused on industrialization in the Gilded Age and “small government” after): Rutherford B. Hayes (1877-1881), James A. Garfield (1881), Chester Arthur (1881-1885), Grover Cleveland (1885-1889), William McKinley (1897-1901), Warren G. Harding (1921-1923), Calvin Coolidge (1923-1929)

God, dont get me started on lincoln in a thread that is talking about statism!

 

[whitehall]

Lefties used to dig up tricky Dick Nixon when they had a political setback. Now they call Reagan names. Much ado about noting from the angry incoherent crazy left that can't seem to deal with reality.

 

[TNHarley]

Lefties used to dig up tricky Dick Nixon when they had a political setback. Now they call Reagan names. Much ado about noting from the angry incoherent crazy left that can't seem to deal with reality.

Ive been calling reagan names since i read about his bullshit anti american policies.
Im far from a "lefty" pretty sure you know that

 

[Cosmos]

I have noticed the Republicans call them that. However, at the same time, defend that goober through thick and thin.
Why?

I think that you are overstating the case, quit a bit,


BUT, another point is that times have changed. A couple of examples.


1. Being a strong anti-communist is less central now.

2. Free Trade was a policy that made a lot of sense then. Now, it, at least as it has been practiced, is obviously an utter failure.

3. Immigration was a very different situation then. A reasonable person could reasonable expect things to work out without much fuss. Now only the deeply deluded could think that.


Just off the top of my head. I'm sure there is more, that will come up.

Good points, all.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

God, dont get me started on lincoln in a thread that is talking about statism!

No shit. He did one good thing, but otherwise, just shat on all rights and the constitution.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Lefties used to dig up tricky Dick Nixon when they had a political setback. Now they call Reagan names. Much ado about noting from the angry incoherent crazy left that can't seem to deal with reality.

Dude, Harley is FAR from what I would consider a "lefty".

 

[TNHarley]

Lefties used to dig up tricky Dick Nixon when they had a political setback. Now they call Reagan names. Much ado about noting from the angry incoherent crazy left that can't seem to deal with reality.

Dude, Harley is FAR from what I would consider a "lefty".

Well, to be fair, my signature SCREAMS leftist

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Good points, all.

You:

 

[Weatherman2020]

I have noticed the Republicans call them that. However, at the same time, defend that goober through thick and thin.
Why?

Military moral skyrocketed.
Generations old Cold War was won. Russian leaders were relaxing at the Reagan ranch instead of chest thumping.
Economy went from 13% unemployment and 22% home loan rates to normal levels. One million jobs were gained in one month.
Taxes on average Americans plummeted.
Initiated Star Wars which we are reaping the benefits of today.
Took on government unions and won.
And most of all established a positive outlook that Americans emulated.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Well, to be fair, my signature SCREAMS leftist

Nothing scream "leftist" like Thomas Jefferson and Calvin Coolidge.

Liberal (classic liberal)? Yes. Leftist (Marxist)? Not even close.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Military moral skyrocketed.
Generations old Cold War was won. Russian leaders were relaxing at the Reagan ranch instead of chest thumping.
Economy went from 13% unemployment and 22% home loan rates to normal levels. One million jobs were gained in one month.
Taxes on average Americans plummeted.
Initiated Star Wars which we are reaping the benefits of today.
Took on government unions and won.
And most of all established a positive outlook that Americans emulated.

We're not saying Reagan didn't do good things. To enshrine him in the cloak of all things right and just is where I take issue. Reagan had many faults and was only considered a great president because Jimmy Carter was so motherfucking horrible, and generations had passed since a president was pro-business (the last being Coolidge or maybe Eisenhower).