Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: arrogantsob

You sound like the democrats: ‘Reagan won because of his sunny optimism’.

He won because he drove home the point that the bullshit transpiring in the country was dead wrong, unconstitutional, and dangerous to our survival.

As for FDR, he won his last two elections by less than 5 mil, and 2.5 mil, respectively, equating to 54% and 53% of the vote. Reagan won re-election at 59%. And had Reagan run a third term instead of the hapless GHWB, the would have won even bigger.


315 posted on 07/07/2009 10:28:57 PM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies ]


To: pissant

Don’t distort what I said.

His personality was a very important aspect of his appeal. Just as it was to Clinton’s. You can’t deny that. What the hell electorate are you looking at?

He won because he could COMMUNICATE his views. And his personality was a huge factor in that communication. His ability to handle the media has no parallel.

Someone like Duncan Hunter has no chance to go big time facing this electorate. He is simply too grim looking. It isn’t his fault and I have the same aspect. We simply are not photogenic enough.

The only significant fundamental changes that came out of Reagan’s administration was the tax cuts (which Kennedy had done as well) and the rebuilding of the military. Government did not shrink so the rhetoric was not realized. It grew instead. But it would have taken a miracle for him to accomplish that.

Well you have to admit that FDR’s last election was like electing a dead man. He looked awful and very sick.


316 posted on 07/09/2009 10:13:30 PM PDT by arrogantsob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson