Posted on 01/10/2020 6:55:03 AM PST by ChicagoConservative27
So you actually think the country would be better off with one of these Rat socialist pigs? Omg
I suspect that Mark Weinberg is just another warmongering neo-con artist. Unfortunately, Reagan brought the neo-con artist scum into prominence in the gop.
How do you draw that conclusion?
I am a Reaganite and I will contend that Reagan was (and is) the best president of the modern era. Given what the world and the country were like leading into his presidency and what both looked like when he left makes him bar far the most effective president of recent times.
But I also recognize, which this clown does not, that different times call for different men. And different men have different approaches.
Trump is the right man for THIS time and THIS world. To look at him through the lens of Reagan is not fair to him nor is it realistic.
The problem here isn’t that Trump behaves differently than Reagan did or would have. Of course he does...…….and who cares?!?
This tool needs to lighten up. Reagan was about results. Sure, he was polished and I don’t think anyone would argue more refined in his approach, but in the end he wanted to strengthen America, no differently from what Trump wants and is doing.
There is no need to compare because they are not comparable. They are two distinct men for two distinct times.
Neo-Con.
Another mutt (Rhino) who thinks he channel’s RR from the grave.
Know one knows what Reagan would think of Trump.
I know this he would support Trump over any of the socialists running as Democrats.
As a Reagan supporter who was never fond of his or any other political party I switched to Trump from Cruz very early on as Cruz hooked sharply to the left on amnesty.
Out of a vast field of candidates Donald Trump was the only actual nationalist.
To me, having a Nationalist who loves his country is vastly more important than the letter on the Jersey.
Bush League Republican, the Reagan White House was full of them.
A little context on that. Reagan did what he had to do to win the cold war, and to start to rid the world of nuclear weapons.
He was ultimately a lover of peace, and that is what he wanted most deeply.
Same as Trump.
Trump probably needs a neocon or two around him (I liked it when Bolton was in there, personally) to see the need to use decisive force when necessary. And when you do, be lethal and quick and overwhelming. This is sort of the side of Trump that killed that iranian terrorist. This is the side of Reagan that caused the hostages to be freed the moment he was sworn in.
But then the libertarian Trump kicks in. He is a man of peace. This side of Trump needs to listen to the (dare I say it...) the Ron Paul side of his cabinet. Or just listen to his own instincts. Because he is spot on. (This same analysis illuminate his trade policies, which are leading to better and even freer trade.....).
Trump and Reagan both knew how to cultivate and benefit from domestic and international alliances. But ultimately their own principles governed.
That’s how I see it anyways. :)
So the test is, what about the people supported Reagan in 1976 in his insurgent and nearly successful campaign against President Ford?
I’d say those awesome and brave souls are Trump supporters.
Unfortunately, you are 100% correct.
Ronald Reagan would absolutely love Donald Trump
There are so many similarities between the two men and their philosophies and I believe with certainty that given that Donald Trump was in his prime during the Reagan presidency he got to see the master at work studied him in great detail and is using many of the techniques that Reagan used in his presidency
The check pants golf club going republicans that are all just so horrified by trumps rough New York demeanor can go take their panties crumpled them up in a wad crawl in a corner and put it duncecap on
Even if it meant four years of Dukakis, perhaps the GOP would have been better off in the long-run if Georgie I lost in 1988.
I was slower to switch from Cruz, but Amnesty and then criticism of Trump for democrats initiating violence at Trump rallies did it.
Excellent post. Excellent.
The other thing I think that is important to note is that Reagan’s judgment was, for the most part, spot on. He was a very strategic thinker.
We can lament bringing on Bush. But if you go back in time and consider the state of the party....might that not have been necessary?
We can lament appointing O’Connor. But while she was bad on life and a few other things....she was a good jurist, to a point.
Reagan only had eight years.
He moved the needle significantly. significantly!
I don’t think it’s helpful to look back and point to the areas where the man didn’t move the needle enough.
Now if Kemp had been elected in 88, we would’ve done a bit better......but you can’t win ‘em all.
He’s a David Frum Republican.
And Bush moved the needle right back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.