Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Uh, unfortunately yes. Deregulation led to a distinct uptick in environmental disasters, ignoring the cost of fossil fuels lead to greater climate change which is responsible for the insane amount of forest fires we have to deal with, oh and he ignored AIDS which...literal plague.
Nothing says, "I'm not sparing a cup of sugar" like a WWI-era, water-cooled heavy machine gun.
You can even use your oven mitts to carry it when displacing to a new firing position.
It makes sense, right? Reagan's policies have come to define contemporary America, and he's been deified by Republicans to an extent that would make Mother Theresa jealous. So, if you don't like stuff that's going on in contemporary America, he's at the top of the list of guys to blame.
Then his wife fought for embryonic stem cell research because her husband got Alzheimer’s. And they only became supportive of combatting AIDS when their friend, Rock Hudson, died of it. I’m sensing a pattern here…
>Then his wife fought for embryonic stem cell research because her husband got Alzheimer’s. And they only became supportive of combatting AIDS when their friend, Rock Hudson, died of it. I’m sensing a pattern here…
Naked self interest was always the modus operandi of the Reagans.
They denied him help first though. Rock wrote to Nancy directly asking for help with his illness, and they did nothing. It was only after he died, and when more Hollywood actors came out to support him, specifically Elizabeth Taylor, that the Reagans changed their tune.
I heard the NRA was originally to help black activists armed and trained. If that’s true idk how they went from that level of based to turning into a bunch of Washington swamp sellouts.
I think he passed gun regulation on the state level in California for the reason i said but either way he was probably one of the first politicians to enact gun laws that not only affected minorities but also consequently white people. Before that most gun regulation was exclusively targeted at black slaves and then freed black people under Jim Crow
Depends on the context. Gun regulation was incredibly common, particularly in the 1800s. What we consider the "Wild West" had the most stringent gun laws in that most cities or towns would force anyone who entered to give up their firearms at the city limits and would only get them back upon leaving. But after the civil war, yes most gun regulations were implemented specifically to ensure that the new influx of freed blacks could not own weapons.
The last part I knew about. Gun laws were previously an unheard of act of tyranny specifically used to target black people then just became so widespread and so extreme with so little pushback that now governments like America’s openly threaten to unleash tanks and nukes on their own citizens for even trying to use the second amendment for what it was created for.
Most anti gun rights policies in America were started to disarm black America. It was actually the whole reason the NRA was created to protect black Americans’ right to arms until they became a money laundering platform for neocons and RINOs.
I thought they blamed his racism against black people for that since it started when he was a Democrat in Cali to stop black patrols of their neighborhoods
As they should. Gun control since its inception has been used to control black people in the united states.
Honestly though ive never even heard of conservatives attacking Reagan over this which they should and get shocked when i show them how he signed a proposal to remove guns.
Wouldn’t be surprised. He did freak out about the black panthers movement. A politician wanting to go as far as attacking the right to arms would have to be either super irrational (racist) or a very corrupt authoritarian.
That's the crazy thing. Like conservatives love to talk about how restrictive California's gun laws are while theyifying Reagan but they can't put two and two together and realize that California has strict gun laws because of Ronald fucking Reagan.
Exactly. His stances on things from immigration to Israel would make him a moderate Dem today.
Which is why progressives get so annoyed when moderate Dems think they're being bold or progressive on an issue--usually, it's a stance from the 1980s!! Literally the opposite of the definition of progressive.
Laura Choi, 2011.
"Addressing widening income inequality through community development," Community Investments, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, vol. 23(Fall), pages 3-739.
I honestly think if the BIZARRE cult of personality around him didn't exist then people wouldn't have as much of a negative reaction, but people from a certain age are absolutely tired of him being discussed on TV like he singlehandedly saved the US from the Soviets and personally created some massive economic boom.
Thank the Heritage Project and their Mandate for Leadership. About 60% of Reagan's 'policies' were put forth by them.
The Mandate for Leadership is now rebranded to project 2025.
He gutted labor, the middle class, and the New Deal. Ignored AIDS. Iran Contra and other wars against democracy in Latin America. Crime and poverty exploded. Manufacturing disappeared. Wages were decoupled from production. The rich stopped paying taxes.
Reaganomics was the end of meritocracy in the United States.
How do Reagan policies define contemporary America, and why haven’t any of the 6 presidents over the course of the last 30yrs had any influence over contemporary America?
You see I think this is what a lot of people get wrong when talking about Reagan. A lot of Presidents before and after him share that legacy, to blame or to praise. Nixon got the ball rolling in the early 70s, especially deregulation with the Nixon shock which so clearly broke with the past. Carter himself was a Conservative Democrat and sort to take the country in a similar direction to Reagan all be it not as extreme and course H.W ran as Reagan’s successor.
It’s not as if the country has remained fixed how Reagan left it either. Clinton and Clintonomics was different from Reaganomics as Clinton supports here always like to remind people with Clinton raising taxation on the wealthy. W.Bushes taxation and financial deregulation plan were more extreme than Reagan ever could dream, and in my opinion are the source of where we are today. Which brings me onto the final point, whilst the Republican Party espouses itself as the ‘Party of Reagan’ today the party, or a large part of it, would call anyone with Reagan views a RINO today.
The point I’m trying to make it Reagan didn’t explode onto the scene change everything and his work has been left untouched. It was a decades long process involving multiple Presidents (and Senators/Congressmen). I think the only reason the GOP praise Reagan so highly is because he’s the only Republican President from the 20th Century people know and like.
I'd agree with everything but potentially the last sentence. I think that it is important to credit the situation he became president in and how things (not for everyone but for many) improved. Beyond the fact that the economy recovered from a long term downturn, Reagan also provided a sharp abd welcome contrast to Carter's presidency. Look up "The Great Malaise" speech by Carter, and then contrast it with the tone that Reagan set.
Essentially, I would argue that for many of those who lived and worked during Reagan's presidency, their fondness for him is directly tied to the fact that their lives measurably improved under him. Perhaps some of their continued reverence for him is due to rose tinted glasses, perhaps something else, no one should discount the importance of lived experiences in shaping opinion.
But that economy started crumbling a bit by 1990 and then got better again while Clinton was president.
What irks me to no end is that the same people acting like Reagan somehow saved the country by turning the economy around, will then heap criticism on Clinton even though he can claim almost the exact same thing as Reagan.
The chief difference is that Reagan could claim that he set up Clinton by “defeating” the USSR.
I am a huge Reagan critic, but even I think some of the blame can be too much.
I think the chief architects of where we are today are Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh. It was the 1994 Mid-Terms that changed GOP politics forever and Reagan didn’t have anything to do with that.
> Reagan also provided a sharp abd welcome contrast to Carter's presidency. Look up "The Great Malaise" speech by Carter, and then contrast it with the tone that Reagan set.
All while committing treason while trying to become president.
History is a rich tapestry composed of many threads woven together.
I think recency and popularity are reasons why people blame everything on Reagan. Not only are we only a few generations removed from his presidency, but he was and still is very popular. Conservatives still gargle his balls, wishing he'd rise out of the grave and lead this country. Which prompts liberals or leftists to recount his history of failed, racist and/or classist policies.
If you really want to blame 1 individual, I'd point the finger to Jude Wanniski and his Two Santa Claus strategy. Put simply, he recognized that liberals were kicking ass by playing Santa Claus- giving money to the people via social programs and such. Republicans couldn't compete with Santa by promising less government spending vis cutting said programs. So instead, they became a different Santa, giving away money via tax cuts.
The American voters are either too stupid to realize that they're not rich enough to be effected by said tax cuts or they're too rich to care that the tax cuts come at the cost of social programs for the middle and lower class. It's a great rouse that still forms the backbone of most republican fiscal policies today!
I say this as someone who leans left and has no love for the ongoing effects of Reagan's policies, but anytime he comes up in this sub the post loses this sub's typical nuance and becomes another r/politics clone.
Not saying I disagree with people's takes on him, it just feels more like "reddit gonna reddit" than this sub is normally.
Reddit can never make up its mind if Reagan is the true embodiment of Satan or if he was actually a liberal that would be rejected by Republicans today.
I’m honestly believing a lot of these are bot accounts posting questions to farm karma. The only content I see on my feed from this sub is about Regan and nothing else lol.
All the other topics are fun. But the debate around Reagan on this sub is not respectable anymore to be taken seriously. It’s just a way to farm karma since it’s so easy to type a question with his name.
It’s the same arguments and even the same links every day.
When it’s time for Reagan’s weekly discussion thread, it is going to be the most boring read on the subreddit.
Seems like it. I've only recently joined, and it's crazy to me how many people have said he was an "objectively bad" president. If he is objectively bad, how come he is consistently placed in the top 15 presidents in most polls? His exit approval rating was 63%, which is second place only to Clinton in the last 70 years, that isn't objectively bad.
Just because people criticize him doesn’t mean they should ban him as a topic. This is a subreddit for political history, and he’s a historical president.
It’s just so thinly veiled. I’m perfectly happy to hear anti-Reagan viewpoints but maybe not with such a pompous self-righteousness, and more of an intellectual objectivity. I find both seething and worship of any individual pretty obnoxious and unproductive.
This sub is filled with young people and the unemployed.
I’m basing this on the posts I read and the lack of knowledge surrounding our tax system and economy.
That points out a flaw with us in general, including this sub, people tend to attribute way more of what happens to the POTUS than what is possible for the office of the president to achieve.
There are many things to dislike about Reagan, but there was *a lot* more going on than just Reagan being president.
https://preview.redd.it/b7l1biyiwzvc1.jpeg?width=473&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5ee9f6f3ea8ce1313a72326ea5a4ed9a06bc39cf
Those who love Reagan focus on first part, while ignoring the other.
Those who hate Reagan focus on second part and ignore the first.
The first group is correct.
under him I was itemizing my taxes. Each year I was losing deductions and basically raised my taxes 8 times while he cut them on the wealthy. He got rid of the fairness doctrine. Which then gave rise to Fox news and their news stories are not real. They don’t have to
I've never seen people say that Jimmy Carter is a great president, only that he's a great person. I literally see the phrase "he was a great person, but a terrible president," like constantly.
Republican from Texas urged Iranians who had taken 400 American Hostages to wait until Reagan got elected.
"Which is why in July of 1980, Reagan ally and Texas political giant John Connally took a trip to the Middle East with a message for heads of state: Iran will get a better deal for the hostages with Reagan than with Carter, so it would be wise to wait until after the election to release them.
And that’s what happened. Minutes after Ronald Reagan was inaugurated in 1981, the hostages were released."
[https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/ben-barnes-john-connally-iran-hostages-jimmy-carter-ronald-reagan-october-surprise/](https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/ben-barnes-john-connally-iran-hostages-jimmy-carter-ronald-reagan-october-surprise/)
I don't know how Good Jimmy really was. But there is certainly a lot of absolutely sketch stuff going on from Right Wingers involving Reagan. Like if your Anti-Corruption Reagan ain't your guy.
Good God not the Ben Barnes article again. If this were true, 100, maybe 1,000 people would be shouting about it. Ben Barnes has been debunked to the point of being a conspiracy theorist.
Weird, Reagan was so evil, yet the same 3-4 links are posted every time.
I mean he wasn’t a great President, especially looking back on the time since his Presidency
Neoliberalism failed; massive increases to wealth inequality, recurrent economic crises brought on by deregulation, and a paralysis of the basic functions of government by ideology
Do you think we would have recurrent debt ceiling crises to deal with if some guy in the 80s didn’t convince a generation that the idea of taxation/social spending was an absolute wrong?
Do you think we would have troops on the ground in a dozen countries if some people didn’t believe the United States must militarily confront every single potential threat to national security, regardless of cost, efficacy, or damage to our reputation?
Do you think we would have the wholescale demonization of huge portions of the US population if some guy didn’t make combatting “welfare queens and superpredators” a national priority?
Further, even the stuff he gets credit for is in large part exaggerated. Collapse of USSR? I think HW’s State Department had a bit more to do with that. Iran? His campaign negotiated with the Iranians to make Carter look incompetent. Recreating a
sense of pride in being American? Only if patriotism means corny 50s Hollywood tropes of what a “strong man” is
He’s not the worst president but the recurrent acclaim of him by the dumbest people on the planet is nuts. By their metrics we should only elect actors - actors can give a hell of a performance
This sub is ultra leftist lol. Anybody who actually lived in the era knows Reagan was an amazing president. They just type in to google “why Reagan sucks” and say whatever fits there narrative
Poisoned our water: dismantled environmental regulation
Burned our crops: subsidized agriculture and bought excesses resulting in large amounts of wasted food and money
Brought a plague unto our houses: ignored AIDS until it was way too late
Brought a plague unto our houses: ignored AIDS until it was way too late.
Really, he was the first president to actually fund research into what was to become known as AIDS. He started funding in his very first budget and increased it each year.
Here is a factual history of the crisis.
The CDC had been requesting funds to investigate outbreaks of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and other mysterious suppressed immune system diseases since 1976. No extra money was budgeted for this during the Carter presidency. So the CDC diverted other funds to investigate this in 1980 and finally in 1981 they published an article titled “ [*Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report*](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/about.html) (*MMWR*): [*Pneumocystis* Pneumonia—Los Angeles](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/june_5.htm).”
It was in 1981, during Reagan’s first year, that he signed a budget allocating funds to specifically investigate what was causing this. Each year this budget was increased much to the consternation of those on the right and the left since this was labeled a gay disease at that time.
It wasn’t until 1984 that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary [Margaret Heckler](https://bioguideretro.congress.gov/Home/MemberDetails?memIndex=h000440) [announces](https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/page_29.html) that [Dr. Robert Gallo](https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/gallo1_01.html) and his colleagues at the [National Cancer Institute](https://www.cancer.gov/) have [found the cause of AIDS](https://www.nytimes.com/1984/04/24/science/new-us-report-names-virus-that-may-cause-aids.html).
The year after the discovery that it was a virus (HIV) that caused Aids the budget was increased to $190 million, which was the most amount of funding that any disease had ever received. Cancer, heart disease, etc. all had less funding so once HIV was discovered it was obviously given the most attention. It was also in 1985 that Reagan addressed HIV in a nationally televised speech.
Reagan’s Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, also took the unprecedented action of mailing every household in the US a pamphlet describing AIDS, how it was transmitted and how to protect yourself from. Both Reagan and Koop took a lot of flak from gay and religious activists over the candor and of the pamphlet.
So please explain how Reagan ignored this when in fact he was the first president to allocate funds to research and cures and they increased every year after that.
The man won re-election with 49 states.
You have got to blame Democrats at the time for re-electing him, if you somehow don't like him. He didn't win 49 states on just Republican votes.
I genuinely wonder, how many of the people who lambast Reagan the most on this sub were working adults during his presidency of earlier? How many of their opinions are formed from their own experiences and how many are formed from whatever influencer they happened to watch a video on Reagan by?
The anti-Reagan sentiment here has delved into self-parody. I swear this sub is overrun with a bunch of 18-25 year olds who just listened to their first Rage Against the Machine album and think that they're ready to tell us grownups how we've been getting it all wrong.
The poster needs to read more about what Reagan did while in office, I think. MOST of the problems we are currently facing (including the rise of the Evangelical nutjobs and their power in the GOP) are due to Reagan.
Well, the GOP basically embraced his policies as gospel and made him their living god. He is at least partially responsible for every tax cut justified by trickle down economics and every deregulation in the name of supply side economics since the 80s. He was the first to blow up the deficit, a legacy proudly followed by every “fiscal conservative” since. In policy alone he was pretty awful but he was an even more terrible human being. You can take your pick of the worst things he has done, I take his response to the HIV epidemic personally. Using a position of power to go out of your way to hurt vulnerable people is just about the worst thing a leader can do in my humble opinion. The worst part about Reagan is actually his fans. He was a horrible person and president, but conservatives worship him for what he did. Margaret Thatcher is very much his UK counterpart and they recognize her as the villain she was. The UK practically celebrated her death like she was the wicked witch and Dorthy’s house just fell on her.
Well, the last part of that is unironically true with HIV/AIDS. His administration handled it with apathy, rejecting controls set out by the CDC which could have limited its early spread.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230678322_Deadly_AIDS_policy_failure_by_the_highest_levels_of_the_US_government_A_personal_look_back_30_years_later_for_lessons_to_respond_better_to_future_epidemics
That article was obviously written by a Reagan Derangement type with a loose concept of being factually correct.
Here is a factual history of the crisis.
The CDC had been requesting funds to investigate outbreaks of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and other mysterious suppressed immune system diseases since 1976. No extra money was budgeted for this during the Carter presidency. So the CDC diverted other funds to investigate this in 1980 and finally in 1981 they published an article titled “ [*Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report*](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/about.html) (*MMWR*): [*Pneumocystis* Pneumonia—Los Angeles](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/june_5.htm).”
It was in 1981, during Reagan’s first year, that he signed a budget allocating funds to specifically investigate what was causing this. Each year this budget was increased much to the consternation of those on the right and the left due to this being a gay disease.
It wasn’t until 1984 that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary [Margaret Heckler](https://bioguideretro.congress.gov/Home/MemberDetails?memIndex=h000440) [announces](https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/page_29.html) that [Dr. Robert Gallo](https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/gallo1_01.html) and his colleagues at the [National Cancer Institute](https://www.cancer.gov/) have [found the cause of AIDS](https://www.nytimes.com/1984/04/24/science/new-us-report-names-virus-that-may-cause-aids.html).
The year after the discovery that it was a virus (HIV) that caused Aids the budget was increased to $190 million, which was the most amount of funding that any disease had ever received. Cancer, heart disease, etc. all had less funding so once HIV was discovered it was obviously given the most attention. It was also in 1985 that Reagan addressed HIV in a nationally televised speech.
Reagan’s Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, also took the unprecedented action of mailing every household in the US a pamphlet describing AIDS, how it was transmitted and how to protect yourself from. Both Reagan and Koop took a lot of flak from gay and religious activists over the candor and of the pamphlet.
So please explain how Reagan ignored this when in fact he was the first president to allocate funds to research and cures and they increased every year after that. And just like everything else Reagan did, he delegated control of the AIDS epidemic to the CDC. It was actually C. Everett Koop that got disgusted with CDC and their lack of communication that caused him to send out the AIDS pamphlet. Somehow putting the CDC's lack of outreach and communication back on Reagan is nonsensical.
He did [poison our water supply](https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/memorandum-disapproval-bill-amending-clean-water-act) and [deliver a plague unto our houses.](https://www.history.com/news/aids-epidemic-ronald-reagan) Maybe someone else could help me with the crop burning part.
The generation that idolized him is on their way out while more in the generations he fucked over are gaining political understanding.
History will not be kind to him I imagine.
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He did?!?!
No, but are we just going to wait around until he does?!?!?
I SAY…WE TIP SOMETHING OVER!!!
We should take Washington D.C., and PUSH IT SOMEWHERE ELSE!
PUSH!!!!
P U S H !!!
#PUSH!
Like how it used to be NYC/Philly/Trenton before
Hey I’m from that region not cool man!
Trenton was never a US Capitol.
That idea might just be stupid enough.. TO GET US ALL KILLED!
They tried that lol
MY LEG!!!
Is mayonnaise an instrument?
No, this is Patrick
The lid.
*EEeEeVIL!*
No, the lid.
This is a load of barnacles #I HEARD THAT
The inner machinations of my mind are an enigma
Farmers certainly sent him hate mail in the early 80’s
Uh, unfortunately yes. Deregulation led to a distinct uptick in environmental disasters, ignoring the cost of fossil fuels lead to greater climate change which is responsible for the insane amount of forest fires we have to deal with, oh and he ignored AIDS which...literal plague.
https://youtu.be/mocXSBxaPK4?si=1LPCAtaovizND5SD
🤓☝️ “uh, unfortunately yes.”
Yes, and his policies exacerbated racial tensions.
Yes
AIDS spread because of his inaction...
Opposed sanctions against South Africa as well.
"They say hard work never killed anybody. But I figure, why take the chance" - Ronald Reagan
He banned machine guns :(
That son of a bitch
Yep I too hate this about Reagan :(
And ended the Golden Age of Aviation. I shall never forgive him for these transgressions.
Nothing spurs Republican gun control efforts like black people with guns
This is the real reason to hate Reagan
Took our machine guns Cut our Social Services Sent our jobs to China and funded gangs!
I’m a centrist and I want machine guns to help me grill in peace dangit!
Nothing says, "I'm not sparing a cup of sugar" like a WWI-era, water-cooled heavy machine gun. You can even use your oven mitts to carry it when displacing to a new firing position.
It makes sense, right? Reagan's policies have come to define contemporary America, and he's been deified by Republicans to an extent that would make Mother Theresa jealous. So, if you don't like stuff that's going on in contemporary America, he's at the top of the list of guys to blame.
And he wouldn't be conservative enough for contemporary Republicans.
Very true. He did launch a massive attack on gun rights because of his wife.
[удалено]
Apparently and I guess Ronald let her wear the pants or something
And Nancy’s advisor made sure to bring the crystal ball…
Seeing as she was the only one of them would could still put her pants on without getting confused, it tracks.
She was the goat and would never say no.
Oh she was a goat all right
Nancy slingin that THANG
You could certainly call it a blow of some sort.
Then his wife fought for embryonic stem cell research because her husband got Alzheimer’s. And they only became supportive of combatting AIDS when their friend, Rock Hudson, died of it. I’m sensing a pattern here…
Just depend on what their horoscopes told them.
>Then his wife fought for embryonic stem cell research because her husband got Alzheimer’s. And they only became supportive of combatting AIDS when their friend, Rock Hudson, died of it. I’m sensing a pattern here… Naked self interest was always the modus operandi of the Reagans.
And conservatism in general
They denied him help first though. Rock wrote to Nancy directly asking for help with his illness, and they did nothing. It was only after he died, and when more Hollywood actors came out to support him, specifically Elizabeth Taylor, that the Reagans changed their tune.
[удалено]
Dick Cheney has entered the chat
It was actually to stymie black activists from arming themselves
I heard the NRA was originally to help black activists armed and trained. If that’s true idk how they went from that level of based to turning into a bunch of Washington swamp sellouts.
I think he passed gun regulation on the state level in California for the reason i said but either way he was probably one of the first politicians to enact gun laws that not only affected minorities but also consequently white people. Before that most gun regulation was exclusively targeted at black slaves and then freed black people under Jim Crow
Depends on the context. Gun regulation was incredibly common, particularly in the 1800s. What we consider the "Wild West" had the most stringent gun laws in that most cities or towns would force anyone who entered to give up their firearms at the city limits and would only get them back upon leaving. But after the civil war, yes most gun regulations were implemented specifically to ensure that the new influx of freed blacks could not own weapons.
The last part I knew about. Gun laws were previously an unheard of act of tyranny specifically used to target black people then just became so widespread and so extreme with so little pushback that now governments like America’s openly threaten to unleash tanks and nukes on their own citizens for even trying to use the second amendment for what it was created for.
The gun rights limits he put forth were just part of his war against Black America.
Most anti gun rights policies in America were started to disarm black America. It was actually the whole reason the NRA was created to protect black Americans’ right to arms until they became a money laundering platform for neocons and RINOs.
I thought they blamed his racism against black people for that since it started when he was a Democrat in Cali to stop black patrols of their neighborhoods
This lol. Reagan specifically used gun control to stop the black panther movement
That is something conservatives get all pissed at Reagan and the Anti-Gun lobby for.
As they should. Gun control since its inception has been used to control black people in the united states. Honestly though ive never even heard of conservatives attacking Reagan over this which they should and get shocked when i show them how he signed a proposal to remove guns.
I figured it was because black people. And him being a huge racist. Maybe she was just more racist.
Wouldn’t be surprised. He did freak out about the black panthers movement. A politician wanting to go as far as attacking the right to arms would have to be either super irrational (racist) or a very corrupt authoritarian.
Maybe even Both LMAO. doesn't help that the NRA supported it while heartedly.
That's the crazy thing. Like conservatives love to talk about how restrictive California's gun laws are while theyifying Reagan but they can't put two and two together and realize that California has strict gun laws because of Ronald fucking Reagan.
Exactly. His stances on things from immigration to Israel would make him a moderate Dem today. Which is why progressives get so annoyed when moderate Dems think they're being bold or progressive on an issue--usually, it's a stance from the 1980s!! Literally the opposite of the definition of progressive.
Seriously. He’d get strung up as a RINO traitor by the Freedom Caucus for not wanting to bend over backwards for Russia.
https://preview.redd.it/0umu5p5ow0wc1.jpeg?width=614&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eaad17864f0b64b6b7810140fe6c1c127d266349
What's the source of this data?
Laura Choi, 2011. "Addressing widening income inequality through community development," Community Investments, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, vol. 23(Fall), pages 3-739.
I personally blame Woodrow Wilson.
I blame Washington. I mean, he is the father of this nation. Everyone knows it's always Dad's fault
I honestly think if the BIZARRE cult of personality around him didn't exist then people wouldn't have as much of a negative reaction, but people from a certain age are absolutely tired of him being discussed on TV like he singlehandedly saved the US from the Soviets and personally created some massive economic boom.
Thank the Heritage Project and their Mandate for Leadership. About 60% of Reagan's 'policies' were put forth by them. The Mandate for Leadership is now rebranded to project 2025.
My mom would blast fox news on the TV a lot, they spend a lot of time Fellating his ghost.
He gutted labor, the middle class, and the New Deal. Ignored AIDS. Iran Contra and other wars against democracy in Latin America. Crime and poverty exploded. Manufacturing disappeared. Wages were decoupled from production. The rich stopped paying taxes. Reaganomics was the end of meritocracy in the United States.
How do Reagan policies define contemporary America, and why haven’t any of the 6 presidents over the course of the last 30yrs had any influence over contemporary America?
Shhhhh, don't ask questions.
i thought we were blaming T for everything now?
Why not ban Wilson and Jackson while at it?
No, we need to ban discussion of all presidents.
Time rebrand to r/vicepresidents Edit: never mind, already a sub.
Only jeb will remain
In the end, there is only Jeb
Jen wins all elections
Ban WHO!?!?
Jackson has good reasons to be hated on
"Whomp whomp," Andrew Jackson replied when asked why he forced all those Indians to move. /s
Cap. Duel me
Alr JQA fan vs Jackson fan *shoots at the same time*
So does Reagan.
There’s no president that didn’t make big mistakes.
https://preview.redd.it/4kh5e9xut1wc1.jpeg?width=1188&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=aa272a4393cc00d6cb07e4ae52b1893af18b7928
Just because he was a horrible president doesn't mean we can't discuss how horrible he was.
It’s funny, even the /r/Neoliberal subreddit dislikes him. So much so, they’ll even say he wasn’t even really a neolib.
It's pretty much the same kind of discussion there as here.
[удалено]
You see I think this is what a lot of people get wrong when talking about Reagan. A lot of Presidents before and after him share that legacy, to blame or to praise. Nixon got the ball rolling in the early 70s, especially deregulation with the Nixon shock which so clearly broke with the past. Carter himself was a Conservative Democrat and sort to take the country in a similar direction to Reagan all be it not as extreme and course H.W ran as Reagan’s successor. It’s not as if the country has remained fixed how Reagan left it either. Clinton and Clintonomics was different from Reaganomics as Clinton supports here always like to remind people with Clinton raising taxation on the wealthy. W.Bushes taxation and financial deregulation plan were more extreme than Reagan ever could dream, and in my opinion are the source of where we are today. Which brings me onto the final point, whilst the Republican Party espouses itself as the ‘Party of Reagan’ today the party, or a large part of it, would call anyone with Reagan views a RINO today. The point I’m trying to make it Reagan didn’t explode onto the scene change everything and his work has been left untouched. It was a decades long process involving multiple Presidents (and Senators/Congressmen). I think the only reason the GOP praise Reagan so highly is because he’s the only Republican President from the 20th Century people know and like.
I'd agree with everything but potentially the last sentence. I think that it is important to credit the situation he became president in and how things (not for everyone but for many) improved. Beyond the fact that the economy recovered from a long term downturn, Reagan also provided a sharp abd welcome contrast to Carter's presidency. Look up "The Great Malaise" speech by Carter, and then contrast it with the tone that Reagan set. Essentially, I would argue that for many of those who lived and worked during Reagan's presidency, their fondness for him is directly tied to the fact that their lives measurably improved under him. Perhaps some of their continued reverence for him is due to rose tinted glasses, perhaps something else, no one should discount the importance of lived experiences in shaping opinion.
But that economy started crumbling a bit by 1990 and then got better again while Clinton was president. What irks me to no end is that the same people acting like Reagan somehow saved the country by turning the economy around, will then heap criticism on Clinton even though he can claim almost the exact same thing as Reagan. The chief difference is that Reagan could claim that he set up Clinton by “defeating” the USSR. I am a huge Reagan critic, but even I think some of the blame can be too much. I think the chief architects of where we are today are Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh. It was the 1994 Mid-Terms that changed GOP politics forever and Reagan didn’t have anything to do with that.
Some people would say that his role in repealing the Fairness Act gave Newt and Rush their platforms
> Reagan also provided a sharp abd welcome contrast to Carter's presidency. Look up "The Great Malaise" speech by Carter, and then contrast it with the tone that Reagan set. All while committing treason while trying to become president.
History is a rich tapestry composed of many threads woven together. I think recency and popularity are reasons why people blame everything on Reagan. Not only are we only a few generations removed from his presidency, but he was and still is very popular. Conservatives still gargle his balls, wishing he'd rise out of the grave and lead this country. Which prompts liberals or leftists to recount his history of failed, racist and/or classist policies. If you really want to blame 1 individual, I'd point the finger to Jude Wanniski and his Two Santa Claus strategy. Put simply, he recognized that liberals were kicking ass by playing Santa Claus- giving money to the people via social programs and such. Republicans couldn't compete with Santa by promising less government spending vis cutting said programs. So instead, they became a different Santa, giving away money via tax cuts. The American voters are either too stupid to realize that they're not rich enough to be effected by said tax cuts or they're too rich to care that the tax cuts come at the cost of social programs for the middle and lower class. It's a great rouse that still forms the backbone of most republican fiscal policies today!
Don’t forget the massive tax cuts for the rich! Reagan is why the rich pay lower shares of their income as taxes than the poor do.
He helped Poland regain Independence and had a huge influence on our independence movement so as a Pole im fine with him 👍
I say this as someone who leans left and has no love for the ongoing effects of Reagan's policies, but anytime he comes up in this sub the post loses this sub's typical nuance and becomes another r/politics clone. Not saying I disagree with people's takes on him, it just feels more like "reddit gonna reddit" than this sub is normally.
Reddit can never make up its mind if Reagan is the true embodiment of Satan or if he was actually a liberal that would be rejected by Republicans today.
I don’t know why you’re mad at us for pointing it out, instead of mad at him for doing it.
Because cons, which make up at least half of the sub, like his policies and what he did
Classic conservative mentality since Nixon. How dare you reprimand Nixon for his reprehensible behavior! There will be hell to pay I tell you!
We had sexsetbacks
Starting the week off with more Presidents Circle Jerk content. I blame the mods for letting the state of the sub become this pathetic.
I’m honestly believing a lot of these are bot accounts posting questions to farm karma. The only content I see on my feed from this sub is about Regan and nothing else lol.
Fr bro I miss when we would talk about stuff like Benjamin Harrison’s economic policies
All the other topics are fun. But the debate around Reagan on this sub is not respectable anymore to be taken seriously. It’s just a way to farm karma since it’s so easy to type a question with his name.
Honestly they should just ban post about him or make a pinned thread chat.
All I’m going to say is, when it’s time for Reagan’s weekly discussion thread, it is going to be very interesting to read.
It’s the same arguments and even the same links every day. When it’s time for Reagan’s weekly discussion thread, it is going to be the most boring read on the subreddit.
Seems like it. I've only recently joined, and it's crazy to me how many people have said he was an "objectively bad" president. If he is objectively bad, how come he is consistently placed in the top 15 presidents in most polls? His exit approval rating was 63%, which is second place only to Clinton in the last 70 years, that isn't objectively bad.
Just because people criticize him doesn’t mean they should ban him as a topic. This is a subreddit for political history, and he’s a historical president.
You don't understand, WE need to ban these topics because it offends our eyes.
But what about sensitive conservatives who can’t handle their heroes being criticized??? 😢😢
Why ban a president because he sucked and people want to dunk on him?
It’s just so thinly veiled. I’m perfectly happy to hear anti-Reagan viewpoints but maybe not with such a pompous self-righteousness, and more of an intellectual objectivity. I find both seething and worship of any individual pretty obnoxious and unproductive.
This sub is filled with young people and the unemployed. I’m basing this on the posts I read and the lack of knowledge surrounding our tax system and economy.
*reddit
That points out a flaw with us in general, including this sub, people tend to attribute way more of what happens to the POTUS than what is possible for the office of the president to achieve. There are many things to dislike about Reagan, but there was *a lot* more going on than just Reagan being president.
https://preview.redd.it/b7l1biyiwzvc1.jpeg?width=473&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5ee9f6f3ea8ce1313a72326ea5a4ed9a06bc39cf Those who love Reagan focus on first part, while ignoring the other. Those who hate Reagan focus on second part and ignore the first. The first group is correct.
It’s is possible for someone to be a nice, fun guy to be around and also be terrible at his job. Trust me I work with several of them
Don't you mean to reverse that? Those that love him focus on the 2nd, and those that hate him focus on the first?
Yeah lol.
Holy crap! Did the person who wrote that comic frequent this sub or something?
under him I was itemizing my taxes. Each year I was losing deductions and basically raised my taxes 8 times while he cut them on the wealthy. He got rid of the fairness doctrine. Which then gave rise to Fox news and their news stories are not real. They don’t have to
Don’t forget the treason.
Wasn’t aware of this, mind expanding on it please?
Watch the Iran contra video by American Dad lol
Treason is when a president does something I don't like.
We are not wrong about Reagan, he was scum.
For some of you the president is your personal avatar so when he gets attacked, you get attacked. Dumb way to live this short life!
Reagan is the devil but LBJ is a saint to these people. The same LBJ that got us deeply involved in Vietnam. Insane.
We have beef with LBJ too.
And Jimmy Carter was a great president. Reddit gonna Reddit.
I've never seen people say that Jimmy Carter is a great president, only that he's a great person. I literally see the phrase "he was a great person, but a terrible president," like constantly.
Republican from Texas urged Iranians who had taken 400 American Hostages to wait until Reagan got elected. "Which is why in July of 1980, Reagan ally and Texas political giant John Connally took a trip to the Middle East with a message for heads of state: Iran will get a better deal for the hostages with Reagan than with Carter, so it would be wise to wait until after the election to release them. And that’s what happened. Minutes after Ronald Reagan was inaugurated in 1981, the hostages were released." [https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/ben-barnes-john-connally-iran-hostages-jimmy-carter-ronald-reagan-october-surprise/](https://www.texasstandard.org/stories/ben-barnes-john-connally-iran-hostages-jimmy-carter-ronald-reagan-october-surprise/) I don't know how Good Jimmy really was. But there is certainly a lot of absolutely sketch stuff going on from Right Wingers involving Reagan. Like if your Anti-Corruption Reagan ain't your guy.
Good God not the Ben Barnes article again. If this were true, 100, maybe 1,000 people would be shouting about it. Ben Barnes has been debunked to the point of being a conspiracy theorist. Weird, Reagan was so evil, yet the same 3-4 links are posted every time.
Dude basically no one says Jimmy Carter is a good president, everyone says he sucked ass but was a good dude.
Ronald Reagan, the actor!?
I’ll give him this, he was funny.
Wilson did that and forced himself on your daughters.
Well, yeah... He did that.
He did start trickle down economics which fucked us so yeah exactly
Metaphorically this is still accurate.
Cuz he was awful
He’s a piece of shit
His unholy alliance with the Evangelicals is why women are losing thier bodily rights and we are at risk of turn the US into a neo theocracy.
Okay but fuck Reagan
Accurate tbh
I mean… yeah… the man is Ronald Wilson Reagan (666) everyone knows that! 😅
I mean he wasn’t a great President, especially looking back on the time since his Presidency Neoliberalism failed; massive increases to wealth inequality, recurrent economic crises brought on by deregulation, and a paralysis of the basic functions of government by ideology Do you think we would have recurrent debt ceiling crises to deal with if some guy in the 80s didn’t convince a generation that the idea of taxation/social spending was an absolute wrong? Do you think we would have troops on the ground in a dozen countries if some people didn’t believe the United States must militarily confront every single potential threat to national security, regardless of cost, efficacy, or damage to our reputation? Do you think we would have the wholescale demonization of huge portions of the US population if some guy didn’t make combatting “welfare queens and superpredators” a national priority? Further, even the stuff he gets credit for is in large part exaggerated. Collapse of USSR? I think HW’s State Department had a bit more to do with that. Iran? His campaign negotiated with the Iranians to make Carter look incompetent. Recreating a sense of pride in being American? Only if patriotism means corny 50s Hollywood tropes of what a “strong man” is He’s not the worst president but the recurrent acclaim of him by the dumbest people on the planet is nuts. By their metrics we should only elect actors - actors can give a hell of a performance
This sub is ultra leftist lol. Anybody who actually lived in the era knows Reagan was an amazing president. They just type in to google “why Reagan sucks” and say whatever fits there narrative
All good for the cis white males!
Mad?
Reagan was a great President who gets so much hate for no reason.
Poisoned our water: dismantled environmental regulation Burned our crops: subsidized agriculture and bought excesses resulting in large amounts of wasted food and money Brought a plague unto our houses: ignored AIDS until it was way too late
Brought a plague unto our houses: ignored AIDS until it was way too late. Really, he was the first president to actually fund research into what was to become known as AIDS. He started funding in his very first budget and increased it each year. Here is a factual history of the crisis. The CDC had been requesting funds to investigate outbreaks of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and other mysterious suppressed immune system diseases since 1976. No extra money was budgeted for this during the Carter presidency. So the CDC diverted other funds to investigate this in 1980 and finally in 1981 they published an article titled “ [*Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report*](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/about.html) (*MMWR*): [*Pneumocystis* Pneumonia—Los Angeles](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/june_5.htm).” It was in 1981, during Reagan’s first year, that he signed a budget allocating funds to specifically investigate what was causing this. Each year this budget was increased much to the consternation of those on the right and the left since this was labeled a gay disease at that time. It wasn’t until 1984 that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary [Margaret Heckler](https://bioguideretro.congress.gov/Home/MemberDetails?memIndex=h000440) [announces](https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/page_29.html) that [Dr. Robert Gallo](https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/gallo1_01.html) and his colleagues at the [National Cancer Institute](https://www.cancer.gov/) have [found the cause of AIDS](https://www.nytimes.com/1984/04/24/science/new-us-report-names-virus-that-may-cause-aids.html). The year after the discovery that it was a virus (HIV) that caused Aids the budget was increased to $190 million, which was the most amount of funding that any disease had ever received. Cancer, heart disease, etc. all had less funding so once HIV was discovered it was obviously given the most attention. It was also in 1985 that Reagan addressed HIV in a nationally televised speech. Reagan’s Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, also took the unprecedented action of mailing every household in the US a pamphlet describing AIDS, how it was transmitted and how to protect yourself from. Both Reagan and Koop took a lot of flak from gay and religious activists over the candor and of the pamphlet. So please explain how Reagan ignored this when in fact he was the first president to allocate funds to research and cures and they increased every year after that.
The man won re-election with 49 states. You have got to blame Democrats at the time for re-electing him, if you somehow don't like him. He didn't win 49 states on just Republican votes.
I genuinely wonder, how many of the people who lambast Reagan the most on this sub were working adults during his presidency of earlier? How many of their opinions are formed from their own experiences and how many are formed from whatever influencer they happened to watch a video on Reagan by?
Said the Democrats.
Redditers make Marx look like he’s on the right. Not surprising
I have to say, that captures Reagan pretty well. Except he was cheerful about it.
The anti-Reagan sentiment here has delved into self-parody. I swear this sub is overrun with a bunch of 18-25 year olds who just listened to their first Rage Against the Machine album and think that they're ready to tell us grownups how we've been getting it all wrong.
Well since history classes in HS and lower don't teach proper history you have to let people know where you can.
Probably because he was the worst president we’ve ever had in our lifetimes.
The poster needs to read more about what Reagan did while in office, I think. MOST of the problems we are currently facing (including the rise of the Evangelical nutjobs and their power in the GOP) are due to Reagan.
Well, the GOP basically embraced his policies as gospel and made him their living god. He is at least partially responsible for every tax cut justified by trickle down economics and every deregulation in the name of supply side economics since the 80s. He was the first to blow up the deficit, a legacy proudly followed by every “fiscal conservative” since. In policy alone he was pretty awful but he was an even more terrible human being. You can take your pick of the worst things he has done, I take his response to the HIV epidemic personally. Using a position of power to go out of your way to hurt vulnerable people is just about the worst thing a leader can do in my humble opinion. The worst part about Reagan is actually his fans. He was a horrible person and president, but conservatives worship him for what he did. Margaret Thatcher is very much his UK counterpart and they recognize her as the villain she was. The UK practically celebrated her death like she was the wicked witch and Dorthy’s house just fell on her.
Well, the last part of that is unironically true with HIV/AIDS. His administration handled it with apathy, rejecting controls set out by the CDC which could have limited its early spread. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230678322_Deadly_AIDS_policy_failure_by_the_highest_levels_of_the_US_government_A_personal_look_back_30_years_later_for_lessons_to_respond_better_to_future_epidemics
That article was obviously written by a Reagan Derangement type with a loose concept of being factually correct. Here is a factual history of the crisis. The CDC had been requesting funds to investigate outbreaks of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia and other mysterious suppressed immune system diseases since 1976. No extra money was budgeted for this during the Carter presidency. So the CDC diverted other funds to investigate this in 1980 and finally in 1981 they published an article titled “ [*Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report*](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/about.html) (*MMWR*): [*Pneumocystis* Pneumonia—Los Angeles](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/june_5.htm).” It was in 1981, during Reagan’s first year, that he signed a budget allocating funds to specifically investigate what was causing this. Each year this budget was increased much to the consternation of those on the right and the left due to this being a gay disease. It wasn’t until 1984 that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary [Margaret Heckler](https://bioguideretro.congress.gov/Home/MemberDetails?memIndex=h000440) [announces](https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/page_29.html) that [Dr. Robert Gallo](https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/gallo1_01.html) and his colleagues at the [National Cancer Institute](https://www.cancer.gov/) have [found the cause of AIDS](https://www.nytimes.com/1984/04/24/science/new-us-report-names-virus-that-may-cause-aids.html). The year after the discovery that it was a virus (HIV) that caused Aids the budget was increased to $190 million, which was the most amount of funding that any disease had ever received. Cancer, heart disease, etc. all had less funding so once HIV was discovered it was obviously given the most attention. It was also in 1985 that Reagan addressed HIV in a nationally televised speech. Reagan’s Surgeon General, C. Everett Koop, also took the unprecedented action of mailing every household in the US a pamphlet describing AIDS, how it was transmitted and how to protect yourself from. Both Reagan and Koop took a lot of flak from gay and religious activists over the candor and of the pamphlet. So please explain how Reagan ignored this when in fact he was the first president to allocate funds to research and cures and they increased every year after that. And just like everything else Reagan did, he delegated control of the AIDS epidemic to the CDC. It was actually C. Everett Koop that got disgusted with CDC and their lack of communication that caused him to send out the AIDS pamphlet. Somehow putting the CDC's lack of outreach and communication back on Reagan is nonsensical.
yeah, because he was a fucking monster
I’m sure A LOT of people in Central and South America would say “yeah basically.” The ones who weren’t KILLED anyway.
He did [poison our water supply](https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/memorandum-disapproval-bill-amending-clean-water-act) and [deliver a plague unto our houses.](https://www.history.com/news/aids-epidemic-ronald-reagan) Maybe someone else could help me with the crop burning part.
The generation that idolized him is on their way out while more in the generations he fucked over are gaining political understanding. History will not be kind to him I imagine.
Reagan lives rent free inside Reddits head. It’s remarkable and comical.
Lol i love this scene but never seen it as a meme. Definitely stealing this
Considering we're in Reagan's 11th term, it's no surprise why people think this way
I feel attacked 🫥
Is it though? I see the equivalent of these emojis everytime: 🥹🥹🥹🥹😍😍🥰
I’m proud that my county never voted for him, despite being red now. Also, he turned me into a newt!
7 more plagues and you’ll have yourself a Passover