If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII


Normally open July 4th only---the one day a year when partisan politics, religion, etc. are acceptable topics on this Board (within reason). The forum is now closed.

If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby bruce3404 » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:29 am

Who would it be? I've leaned to the left of center most of my voting years, but I think I'd have to go with Eisenhower. Maybe it was just the times, but apart from a short-lived recession in the late '50's, he led a period of great prosperity, while ending the Korean War and keeping us out of other wars; in addition, he continued many of the New Deal policies and expanded Social Security while also greatly improving the country's infrastructure, most notably with the Federal Highway Act of 1956. He probably had more public respect than any other leader since and his status as a great President continues to rise through historical analysis. Things got done during Ike's presidency without most of the ridiculous posturing between politicians that seems to characterize today's Washington.
bruce3404
 
Posts: 1566
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:00 am
Location: Track Town, USA

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby kuha » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:33 am

I like that choice.

I'd also be OK with Bush SR (only!!) or Clinton.
kuha
 
Posts: 9036
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Conor Dary » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:38 am

bruce3404 wrote: Things got done during Ike's presidency without most of the ridiculous posturing between politicians that seems to characterize today's Washington.


The problem now is the ridiculous amount of money involved in politics. Pols, especially Republicans, though there are plenty of Dems also, have one constituency, the very rich.

And yes, Eisenhower would be a fine president now, but completely unelectable.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby TrakFan » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:38 am

Clinton
TrakFan
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Colorado Springs

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Conor Dary » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:41 am

TrakFan wrote:Clinton


Clinton would easily have been reelected if the 2 term rule wasn't around.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Marlow » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:41 am

kuha wrote:I like that choice.
I'd also be OK with Bush SR (only!!) or Clinton.

I like Ike. Not either Bush. Clinton as an executive, not as a person. Kennedy had his strengths (and a few weaknesses) - he would have been good for the country if he had two full terms. Nixon, NOT. LBJ was fine. Carter was the BEST person we've ever elected, but a weak Chief Executive. RR - NOT a fan. Obama? TBD.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21134
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby gh » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:45 am

Jed Bartlett
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Marlow » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:54 am

David Palmer!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21134
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby bruce3404 » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:59 am

Marlow wrote: Not either Bush. Nixon, NOT.


I still get a chuckle from the expression I heard during W's presidency; something to the effect that " Bush's presidency makes me wish for the good old days of Nixon."

Since others are naming more than one president, I'd also toss in a vote for Clinton (not as a person, but as someone who got things done in very difficult times which mirror the devisiveness of today's political atmosphere).
bruce3404
 
Posts: 1566
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:00 am
Location: Track Town, USA

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby kuha » Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:05 am

bruce3404 wrote:I'd also toss in a vote for Clinton (not as a person, but as someone who got things done in very difficult times which mirror the devisiveness of today's political atmosphere).


A couple have brought up Clinton's personal failings (which we know were very real). I think a mature point of view on all this is to recognize that Public Virtue must trump Private Vice in the political arena. These are two different realms, and as long as the latter isn't too egregious, we must focus on the former. As said before, Carter was a very fine human being, but that didn't make him an effective leader...
kuha
 
Posts: 9036
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby gh » Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:09 am

I detested Nixon at the time, but in retrospect, not sure he wasn't actually fairly decent at the job. I probably find his Watergate shenanigans easier to forgive than Clinton's wild willy. (and I'm no prude)
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Master Po » Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:10 am

Interesting question, and interesting choice by bruce3404, in picking Eisenhower, esp. as bruce describes himself as left-leaning. When I read the thread title, before clicking into it, Ike was also the one who came to mind for me, and I am a person who has voted Democrat in every Presidential election since I came of voting age. I am a lifelong Dem, but recognize myself less and less in my fellow voting Dems. I've recently been reading some of Eisenhower's speeches, esp. at the end of his term, and find him, well, profound. Perhaps I've been dumbed down by half a century as an American, but he seems to have had his critical faculties intact even at the end of his terms, along with pragmatism, principles, and independence of spirit. Of course now, he wouldn't last past the first or second round of primaries.
Master Po
 
Posts: 2643
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: north coast USA

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby dukehjsteve » Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:13 am

If he could learn to keep his pecker in his pocket I'll say Clinton. A smart man, a good decision maker. But that one flaw.....
dukehjsteve
 
Posts: 6057
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Fishers, IN

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby tandfman » Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:55 am

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Truman.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby bruce3404 » Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:09 pm

dukehjsteve wrote:If he could learn to keep his pecker in his pocket I'll say Clinton. A smart man, a good decision maker. But that one flaw.....


I wasn't a big Clinton fan during that period, but I'll never forget a discussion I had with a German woman on the Beijing subway (how's that for a neutral court?). She ridiculed the American public for being more concerned about what Clinton was doing "on the side" versus what he was doing as President. We know that Kennedy, Clinton, FDR and even my man Ike had mistresses, but back then the opposite political parties didn't use such private matters to assail a President's qualification to be President. Interestingly, those who had mistresses are generally regarded to have all been good Presidents. Too bad Jimmy Carter only lusted after photos in Playboy :lol:
bruce3404
 
Posts: 1566
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:00 am
Location: Track Town, USA

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Marlow » Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:30 pm

gh wrote:I detested Nixon at the time, but in retrospect, not sure he wasn't actually fairly decent at the job. I probably find his Watergate shenanigans easier to forgive than Clinton's wild willy. (and I'm no prude)

Really? I'm just the opposite. Clinton's problem was a sin of the flesh, while Nixon's was an actual crime.
Las Vegas's motto is all about sins of the flesh, so they must not be too bad. No city has a motto that implies crime is OK there.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21134
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Conor Dary » Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:38 pm

Marlow wrote:
gh wrote:I detested Nixon at the time, but in retrospect, not sure he wasn't actually fairly decent at the job. I probably find his Watergate shenanigans easier to forgive than Clinton's wild willy. (and I'm no prude)

Really? I'm just the opposite. Clinton's problem was a sin of the flesh, while Nixon's was an actual crime.
Las Vegas's motto is all about sins of the flesh, so they must not be too bad. No city has a motto that implies crime is OK there.


Shenanigans? Hardly, these are real felonies. Breaking and entering, illegal wire taps? Attempting to cover it up and by the president?

Meanwhile, Clinton had a consensual affair....that if like JFK and FDR no one had heard about until later, no one would have cared.

It fact no one cared at the time anyways. Clinton poll numbers went up after he was impeached.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Master Po » Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:12 pm

As a Dem who voted for Clinton twice, grudgingly the second time. I disagree w some of the analysis of Clinton's "sins."

The European argument doesn't hold -- Clinton was an American politician, and knew it, and knew how this political culture would judge such things, in this era.

The historical argument doesn't hold -- Clinton was a politician in this time, and knew the political and media culture, and its divisiveness and its risks.

His sin was political, and was this: He had a great great amount of political capital, an opportunity to do some great things, to actually speak across some of the divides in this culture, and he threw most of it away because he couldn't keep his pants up, thus alienating lots of people and forcing him to spend an inordinate amount of time defending his political life rather than doing the job he was elected to do. And, had he kept his pants up, I think Gore would have been elected in 2000. I don't care about Florida, blahblahblah. The fact is, in 2000 neither Clinton nor Gore could carry his own state. They never should have counted on Florida, being that it was in the family of Gore's opponent. Their losses in Ark and Tenn were payback for Clinton's political sins. (I don't think Gore would have been one of the greats, but yes, better than Bush the Younger.)

Wasted political career. Did I say that I'm still bitter? Plus, he didn't have a T&F background in hs or college. Loser. Oh well. Here's a smiley to compensate.
:)
Master Po
 
Posts: 2643
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: north coast USA

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby TN1965 » Sun Jul 03, 2011 3:50 pm

NIxon would be totally unelectable today.

He would be a pinko commie symphathizer who is coward enough to have dialogues with the enemies. Besides, he signed Clean Air Act and Title IX into laws, appointed a pro-choice Justice to the Supreme Court, and used fiscal policy to get out of a recession...

Even if he switched the party and won the Democratic nomination, the GOP's negative campaign would succeed in convincing enough voters that he is unpatriotic...
TN1965
 
Posts: 1187
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:38 pm

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby catson52 » Sun Jul 03, 2011 4:08 pm

All those votes for Ike are rather disturbing. He has left one legacy that still makes most Americans see red (and no not communist). That was his sleeping on the job and/or playing at Augusta, whilst the Dulles brothers, egged on by MI5 (or then equivalent) in Britain, engineered a coup against a democratically elected leader in Iran. Still paying the price for that including the hostage crisis of the late seventies. Long term, if Mossadegh had remained in power and proved reasonably balanced in his views (not that unlikely) the Middle East might have reached much better shape 30-40 years back. No need for the Arab Spring in 2011, and we still don't know how that one will turn out.
catson52
 
Posts: 802
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:22 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby jhc68 » Sun Jul 03, 2011 4:30 pm

Odd, isn't it, that Ike issued the warning about the military/industrial complex and yet he was so willing to throw in with Dulles' hare-brained plans like the Iran debacle. Or the whole Bay of Pigs fiasco: a Dulles/Ike production that JFK dutifully allowed to go forward.

Personally, I loathed Nixon then and now but I have to admit a grudging admiration for some of the ballsy stuff he did... meeting Mao, gas rationing, wage and price freeze, Clean Air and Title IX. He'd have been a great president if he had not been a whiney, self-pitying lunatic.

Bush Senior or JFK, they were competent realists.

Reagan, IMHO, was an old actor who was vastly over-rated as a prez.

Bush Jr and LBJ... ugh!!!

Me, gimme a hybrid of Harry Truman's gritty stubborness with Clinton's social savvy.
jhc68
 
Posts: 3291
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Jul 03, 2011 4:51 pm

I can't think of any other President besides LBJ who would have liberated Black folks, so for personal reasons it's, hard for me to go against him. I believe that Carter would have had the determination to do it, but I don't know if he would have had the political skill required. The others, including JFK and Clinton, would not have been willing to spend the political capital, and instead, kicked the can down the road like others before them had done.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Cooter Brown » Sun Jul 03, 2011 5:23 pm

jhc68 wrote:Reagan, IMHO, was an old actor who was vastly over-rated as a prez.


yeah, there's a lot of revisionist history there. It's weird that the GOP decided he would be their personal Jesus and overlook him raising taxes 11 times, increasing the national debt 4-fold, being extremely pro-union, etc. Even though he talked the GOP line, in reality he was pretty much the opposite of their values. Other than wiping out the middle class and shitting on the poor. But, those are the most popular GOP values, so maybe there is a reason they love him.
Cooter Brown
 
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Austin

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby TN1965 » Sun Jul 03, 2011 5:34 pm

Reagan was also the last president to give amnesty to illegal immigrants. Not to mention he was a coward to talk to Gorbachev...

But he has been elevated to a religious figure by the Republicans, so what he actually did no longer matters. The same goes for JFK and the Democrats.
TN1965
 
Posts: 1187
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 8:38 pm

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby jazzcyclist » Sun Jul 03, 2011 5:51 pm

TN1965 wrote:Reagan was also the last president to give amnesty to illegal immigrants. Not to mention he was a coward to talk to Gorbachev...

But he has been elevated to a religious figure by the Republicans, so what he actually did no longer matters. The same goes for JFK and the Democrats.

Don't forget he also cut and ran in Lebanon. Can you imagine if a Democrat did all those things?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby Master Po » Sun Jul 03, 2011 6:57 pm

Even tho I "voted" for Ike in this thread, I get catson's point about Iran 1953. Well, none of these guys gets away clean.


I hadn't really thought about Truman -- I guess I was thinking of him still in the WWII era, but of course he was a post-WWII president for most of his time. I really don't know much of anything about his presidency, and am now surprised at myself for that lack.
Master Po
 
Posts: 2643
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: north coast USA

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby gh » Sun Jul 03, 2011 8:03 pm

Marlow wrote:
gh wrote:I detested Nixon at the time, but in retrospect, not sure he wasn't actually fairly decent at the job. I probably find his Watergate shenanigans easier to forgive than Clinton's wild willy. (and I'm no prude)

Really? I'm just the opposite. Clinton's problem was a sin of the flesh, while Nixon's was an actual crime. ...


I chalk Nixon up to getting caught at "politics as usual."
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby kuha » Sun Jul 03, 2011 8:24 pm

I've definitely become more accepting of Nixon over the years. Absolutely hated him at the time, but now see that--severe personal flaws aside :? --he was intelligent, worldly, and even daring. By today's standards (but ONLY by today's standards), he'd be seen as a leftist.
kuha
 
Posts: 9036
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby gh » Sun Jul 03, 2011 8:57 pm

And this is what's so fascinating about political labels (left v right); not only are they time-dependent, it also depends on what country you're in. What passes as the "conservative" party in some countries is probably to the left of mainstream Dems in the U.S.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby lonewolf » Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:58 pm

Ronald Reagan in a landslide.
Second choice: Harry Truman
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8816
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby shivfan » Mon Jul 04, 2011 12:06 am

lonewolf wrote:Ronald Reagan in a landslide.
Second choice: Harry Truman

I'm glad to see that you're the only one blowing Reagan's trumpet, and that most posters on this thread rightly think reagan is grossly overhyped by the Republicans who are looking back on history thru rose-tinted glasses....

I don't have a problem with Americans revering Ronald Reagan, and building statues to him in the US, but I certainly object to statues to him being built in the UK, even if it's in front of the US embassy....

1) Unnecessarily brutal invasion of Grenada.

2) Supported brutal landowners in vicious civil war in Nicaragua.

3) Took credit for end of Cold War, when the credit really belonged to Gorbachev.

4) Imposed harsh economic conditions on Central America, which kept them in poverty.

5) Despite the ending of the Cold War, he still maintained the ridiculous expenditure on the arms race.

6) Instead of providing support to Gorbachev, his selfish stance led to the rise of Yeltsin in Russia, and led to the country being the way it is now (not a good thing!).

7) Offered support to the apartheid regime in South Africa.

Seven reasons why there should be no statue of Reagan in London....
shivfan
 
Posts: 2591
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:30 am
Location: Just outside London

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby jazzcyclist » Mon Jul 04, 2011 4:07 am

No matter what you think of Reagan, he deserves credit for making peace with the Russians. Gorbachev said that Reagan was the only President they could have ever made peace with because he's the only one they ever trusted. Of course many Republicans, including Dick Cheney, believed Reagan gave the store away at the time.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10860
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby tandfman » Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:43 am

FWIW, I'm not the only one who likes Truman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical ... ted_States
tandfman
 
Posts: 15043
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby kuha » Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:56 am

tandfman wrote:FWIW, I'm not the only one who likes Truman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical ... ted_States


Lots of good stuff here...thanks.
kuha
 
Posts: 9036
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby bad hammy » Mon Jul 04, 2011 9:23 am

kuha wrote:I've definitely become more accepting of Nixon over the years. Absolutely hated him at the time, but now see that--severe personal flaws aside :? --he was intelligent, worldly, and even daring. By today's standards (but ONLY by today's standards), he'd be seen as a leftist.

Nixon did some great things. Number one on my list is killing the military draft a year before I was eligible. China and the EPA were pretty good too . . .
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10881
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby bruce3404 » Mon Jul 04, 2011 9:47 am

bad hammy wrote:Nixon did some great things. Number one on my list is killing the military draft a year before I was eligible.


Just remember that killing of the draft had nothing to do with being a magnanimous gesture on Nixon's part. At that point he had both draft age kids and their parents ready to take to the barricades, thus it was the politically expedient thing to do. I wish we still had a draft during wartime since it probably would have kept us out of all the stupid conflicts we've become involved in since Vietnam. As it is, draft age kids no longer bother to protest much of anything since their asses aren't on the line.
bruce3404
 
Posts: 1566
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 9:00 am
Location: Track Town, USA

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby kuha » Mon Jul 04, 2011 9:53 am

bruce3404 wrote:Just remember that killing of the draft had nothing to do with being a magnanimous gesture on Nixon's part. At that point he had both draft age kids and their parents ready to take to the barricades, thus it was the politically expedient thing to do. I wish we still had a draft during wartime since it probably would have kept us out of all the stupid conflicts we've become involved in since Vietnam. As it is, draft age kids no longer bother to protest much of anything since their asses aren't on the line.


Good point. The draft ensures that a good percentage of the population actually has a stake in our foreign/military policy, and that's a very good thing. When wars are fought with professionals and borrowed money, the population has little (immediate) reason to pay any mind at all.

All this would change with a draft + war tax on the entire population.
kuha
 
Posts: 9036
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby bad hammy » Mon Jul 04, 2011 9:58 am

bruce3404 wrote:
bad hammy wrote:Nixon did some great things. Number one on my list is killing the military draft a year before I was eligible.


Just remember that killing of the draft had nothing to do with being a magnanimous gesture on Nixon's part. At that point he had both draft age kids and their parents ready to take to the barricades, thus it was the politically expedient thing to do. I wish we still had a draft during wartime since it probably would have kept us out of all the stupid conflicts we've become involved in since Vietnam. As it is, draft age kids no longer bother to protest much of anything since their asses aren't on the line.

As to the rationale, Nixon did it - that works for me. As for the effects, I was taking a bit more of a short-term micro rather than long-term macro look at this situation, particularity at the time.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10881
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby jeremyp » Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:15 am

catson52 wrote:All those votes for Ike are rather disturbing. He has left one legacy that still makes most Americans see red (and no not communist). That was his sleeping on the job and/or playing at Augusta, whilst the Dulles brothers, egged on by MI5 (or then equivalent) in Britain, engineered a coup against a democratically elected leader in Iran. Still paying the price for that including the hostage crisis of the late seventies. Long term, if Mossadegh had remained in power and proved reasonably balanced in his views (not that unlikely) the Middle East might have reached much better shape 30-40 years back. No need for the Arab Spring in 2011, and we still don't know how that one will turn out.


While I agree that the Mossadeq affair was a huge mistake, I just don't agree that the M.E. would have been any different. What happens in Iran tends to stay in Iran. After all after when Khomeini came to power we did not see a rush of religious fanatics take power elsewhere, just the opposite. Also Ike's move to spank the U.K., Israel, and France for taking over the Suez Canal balanced him out in the M.E. I too am an adult long Democrat and have found Ike to be loking better and better as well. My choice for Prez would probably be LBJ for domestic issues, and Truman for foreign policy issues.
jeremyp
 
Posts: 4544
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Florida

Re: If You Could Re-Elect Any President Since WWII

Postby jeremyp » Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:31 am

jazzcyclist wrote:No matter what you think of Reagan, he deserves credit for making peace with the Russians. Gorbachev said that Reagan was the only President they could have ever made peace with because he's the only one they ever trusted. Of course many Republicans, including Dick Cheney, believed Reagan gave the store away at the time.


Vis a vis the Russians I think Reagan was in the right place at the right time. Gorbachev was the key. I think many of our Prez's foreign policy can be rated on "timing" rather than brilliance. Nixon: China. JFK: Cuba. Bush Sr., Gulf war.
jeremyp
 
Posts: 4544
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Florida

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests