"At this point, the gloves came off. I remember my last run in with you."
Reagan Man, I frankly have a hard time understanding what you're talking about. At no time have I ever denigrated Pres. Reagan's legacy. Why in the heck would I call myself "calreaganfan"!! My two comments that you cited were both in praise of Pres. Bush's electoral achievements. You inexplicably assume they are attacks on Reagan's legacy. The fact that Pres. Bush has achieved an enormous popular vote count (far exceeding all pre-election predictions) and broken Reagan's record by a wide margin is something worth celebrating (as Reagan would!). The fact that Pres. Bush has also helped to increase the number of Republicans in the House and Senate in both elections of his presidency is something that is truly historic. Citing and celebrating these accomplishments does nothing to denigrate Pres. Reagan.
P.S.: The fact that LBJ was NOT running for re-election in 1964 is the key point. When running for re-election, the President's party usually suffers at the polls as the electorate often desires change. That's why the achievement by Pres. Bush and the Republican Party has not occurred since the 1920s (for the GOP). Not only was Pres. Johnson not running for re-election, he was still the beneficiary of a lot of public sympathy resulting from JFK's assassination, and the Dems had the benefit of running against an opposing party whose presidential candidate was portrayed as a right-wing extremist.
Either you're not paying attention, or you're playing dumb.
>>>>At no time have I ever denigrated Pres. Reagan's legacy.
I said you were undermining Reagan's legacy. If you had denigrated Reagan's legacy, you would have been booted off FR by now.
>>>>Why in the heck would I call myself "calreaganfan"!!
You've been here just over a month. I've had two run ins with you in that time frame and both have centered around you building up PresBush, while tearing down the Reagan legacy. Not a good start.
>>>>The fact that Pres. Bush has achieved an enormous popular vote count (far exceeding all pre-election predictions) and broken Reagan's record by a wide margin is something worth celebrating (as Reagan would!).
Since you keep repeating the same misleading characterizations, I can only assume you want to continue this pissing contest. Perhaps you want to start an all out flame war with me.
As I told you, Bush`s popular vote victory means jackshit. And just because the GOP picked up a few seats in the House and Senate, while historical, it means very little in the big picture. Very little.
>>>>Citing and celebrating these accomplishments does nothing to denigrate Pres. Reagan.
Celebrating Bush`s victory over Kerry is fine. Throwing misleading data into the face of the Reagan legacy is not fine. And besides, its been over a month since the reelection. Time to get back to business. Let's see Bush reverse his big governemnt Republicanism and advance a more conservative agenda.
>>>>The fact that LBJ was NOT running for re-election in 1964 is the key point.
No its not. I'm the one that brought up the issue and I couched it the way I saw fit. Until Bush did it in 2004, LBJ was the last sitting President to increase his party's majority and gain seats in both houses of Congress. That's what counts.
Now, if you want to continue this debate, bring up some new talking points, or move along.