Battle of the polar opposites: FDR vs. RWR

[hangfan91]

FDR favoured increased government and infastructure spending to create government jobs and welfare at a time of economic disaster and led American through World War II.

Reagan favoured reduced size of government and tried to cut government waste and his administration oversaw the fall of communism in East Europe.

Who was the better president?,

[Miles]

FDR, no contest.

[TNF]

I mean I don't really get how anyone can say that Reagan was better if you support capitalism, given that without FDR you'd probably have had a red flag over the White House by 1945.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I wouldn't normally consider these two to be polar opposites, except maybe on the budget.  FDR tried to bring the budget back into balance once he thought the economy was back on track, but that lead to the recession of 1937-8.  Conversely, Reagan didn't worry about trying to balance the budget, which in part is why the economy did so well.

[TNF]

I wouldn't normally consider these two to be polar opposites, except maybe on the budget.  FDR tried to bring the budget back into balance once he thought the economy was back on track, but that lead to the recession of 1937-8.  Conversely, Reagan didn't worry about trying to balance the budget, which in part is why the economy did so well.

I would hardly say that unemployment never going under 7 percent during his whole term in office is an economy that is doing "well," especially when you compare it to the almost nonexistent unemployment figures of the 1950s and 1960s, or the near total employment of everyone in the country during Roosevelt's Third Term. As far as neoliberal Presidencies go, Reagan definitely did the worst job of handling unemployment, although Obama definitely gives him a run for his money there, with Clinton doing the best thanks to the tech boom of the 1990s.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I wouldn't normally consider these two to be polar opposites, except maybe on the budget.  FDR tried to bring the budget back into balance once he thought the economy was back on track, but that lead to the recession of 1937-8.  Conversely, Reagan didn't worry about trying to balance the budget, which in part is why the economy did so well.

I would hardly say that unemployment never going under 7 percent during his whole term in office is an economy that is doing "well," especially when you compare it to the almost nonexistent unemployment figures of the 1950s and 1960s, or the near total employment of everyone in the country during Roosevelt's Third Term. As far as neoliberal Presidencies go, Reagan definitely did the worst job of handling unemployment, although Obama definitely gives him a run for his money there, with Clinton doing the best thanks to the tech boom of the 1990s.

Well, if we want the success Roosevelt had with unemployment in his third term, I guess we can always just have another world war.

[Rockefeller GOP]

For how often Reagan's flaws and mistakes get brought up (fairly), I'll throw some token big red flags of FDR's:
- Blocked federal anti-lynching legislation ... Don't wanna hear the BS that he "needed" Southern Democrats for his New Deal legislation, that's like excising a Republican POTUS blocking a civil rights measure so that he could get his tax cuts through, which no one on this board would do.
- Tried to circumvent his Constitutional authorities when it came to one of our most important and ideally non-partisan beaches of government: the Supreme Court.  Can you imagine the reaction here if Bush had tried to add justices??  Haha.
- Put more than 100,000 Japanese Americans in internment camps ... this speaks for itself.

Both had good and bad qualities, I voted for Reagan.

[SWE]

Not Reagan

[H. Ross Peron]

FDR, no contest.

[Modernity has failed us]

Let's see...the man who pulled the country out of the greatest economic downturn in American history versus the man who accelerated economic inequality and installed dictatorships in nations around the world whilst condemning the USSR...tough...lean FDR.

[New_Conservative]

Reagan

[IceSpear]

FDR, accidentally voted Reagan.

[Mr. Smith]

Reagan is more disgusting than Nixon, his administration was guilty of just as much corruption. I can't say FDR was completely squeaky clean, but he had a way of keeping it all mostly straight.

He still started programs that benefited black people, which made for a slow climb upward towards Civil Rights. Hate to say it Rocky but "he needed Southern Democrats" is a good excuse.

He didn't deliberately start his campaign in a place where horrible racially charged murders happened and subtlely side with those ideologically like those murderers. Any peace Reagan made with the formal apology to those Japanese interned in WWII, is completely nullified by his support for Apartheid.

And if FDR ever did something like Iran-Contra, I must've missed it.

And then there was Reagan's (and by extension everyone after him) efforts on the War on Drugs, which is a disaster. Contrast FDR helping end the stupidity of Prohibition..

He didn't leave mentally disabled people out to dry, Reagan did.

To say FDR curbstomps Reagan is an understatement.

[Goldwater]

Reagan, although I really don't hate FDR.

[AggregateDemand]

It's not really a fair comparison because FDR was screwing around with nascent economic theory (some of which was junk) that few people understood, and he was a pre-WWII president dealing with very limited federal authority. Consequently, he accomplished little besides establishing unconstitutional programs, old-fashioned (by today's standards) entitlements, and he created legislation that led to cringe-worthy restrictions on individual liberty (Wickard v Filburn).

Reagan lived in a different time and place, and he benefited from all of the modernity of his era.

[Flake]

FDR was obviously better, and he's also the reason why socialism didn't take storm in the United States, so conservatives should be thankful for that.

[Sopranos Republican]

Not Reagan

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

To say FDR curbstomps Reagan is an understatement.

[Gass3268]

Considering that Reagan is a vile POS who is deservedly rotting in Hell, I'll go with FDR.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Reagan voted for FDR all four times. I'll vote with him.

[All Along The Watchtower]

FDR and I don't think this is debatable

[Rockefeller GOP]

FDR and I don't think this is debatable

It is.  You guys can't even FATHOM that anyone might not be a liberal Democrat, can you?

[RR1997]

Raygun

[Deus Naturae]

I'll go with Reagan. The New Deal was a total failure at ending the Depression as it cartelized countless industries, grossly distorted agriculture, and imposed labor regulations which unemployed masses of workers. Fortunately for FDR, a panacea for the unemployment problem appeared when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, where FDR had "conveniently" stationed a huge portion of the US fleet (and fired top generals who objected). Unemployment tends to decline when you cart off masses of your citizens to fight overseas. I'd bring up Japanese internment too but Reagan's drug policies were/are just as bad.

Reagan was bad in his own right for a variety of reasons, but at least had some sensible policies. Even with regard to those he was lacking (he ended up repealing nearly half of his initial tax cuts), but he still better than FDR, the ultimate welfare-warfare President.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The guy who had jobs increase by 60% during his Presidency.