JUST

Mate
Do you not realize how high the taxes were before Reagan
They were literally 90%

Even the liberals were fed up with that bullshit, which is why even jew-york voted for him.

Very complex subject that's interrelated with the global economy, Federal Reserve policy, and what's "hip" as far as legislative/executive policy is concerned.

Reagan had some great years for the economy, whether due to his policies or due to Paul Volcker's work with the Federal Reserve. But Clinton had many great years too. Bush Jr. had some horrible years. So did Obama. I don't think Republican or Democrat politicians are clear winners when it comes to economic policy, but I do think Democrats are clear winners when it comes to social programs, and I do think Republicans are clear winners when it comes strictly to "growing" the economy. However, social programs aren't necessarily a solution for the problems they address, and "growth" is not necessarily a useful goal in itself if it doesn't make the community any better.

This user knows his shit. It's cool to dog Reagan now, but if you can remember the 70's you know exactly why he won so big.

Fucking Minnesota

...

Reagan gave amnesty to millions of illegals who then voted blue.

>Percentage
>58.8% >40.6%

>States
>49 >1

>yfw ever since trump there has been a surge in rightwing grandpas on Veeky Forums

>Reagan won California
Literally how?

He was governor of California for years and a famous actor there for even longer

Reagan was literally the one that started all the gun control in California because he didn't like the fact that niggers had guns.

Turns out the one thing that unites Republicans and Democrats is the terror of some black dudes in leather jackets were telling people about their legal rights and forming rifle shooting clubs.

back when the right can actually secure a popular vote

The "Golden Age" of the fifties that republicans love so much was full communism compared to post-Reagan society, and just now the Democrats had a neoliberal corporate shill for a candidate while the Republicans had a protectionist anti-free trade candidate.

Why the fuck is the world so weird?

California used to go solidly red for years. It turned blue due to demographic change, and since then has spiraled further down every since.

a better graph would be to check it towards the denbts too

>WAH, DEMOCRACY SUCKS WHEN PEOPLE I DON'T LIKE GET ELECTED!

Republicans get office because they dont promise open borders.

...

Clinton and Nixon did pretty good, overall.

>people literally can't remember when California was not a Democratic voting bloc anymore

Soon the same will happen to Texas. People will be surprised to know that once Texas was associated with libertarian gun-owners, instead of socialist mestizos

>once Texas was associated with libertarian gun-owners,

Texas was never libertarian.

Because politics in democracy is about aesthetics, not actual policy.

>down

Clinton also partially got some of the benefits of Reagan's policy, which heavily favors business interest, and used that windfall to cut the debt. It's hard to say just how much of the economic performance of a country in the four years of a president's reign is due to the actions of that president, or the previous president, or someone before that.

It does though. Democracy is no better than mob rule.

>due to the actions of that president, or the previous president, or someone before that.

This.

This. Texas is downright communism compared to Arizona especially when it comes to guns.

Realistically, the president's kind of hamstrung when it comes to economic policy compared to Congress. It's sort of a gamble. Either you get to take credit or you get blamed, but it's *mostly* out of your purview

Get the fuck out of my state steerfucker Arizona stronk

>implying I'm a Texan

Reagan was a good president so there was literally no reason to replace him

good thing america isn't a democracy and is instead a representative republic. get better educated teeb. lol

That's a form of democracy, retard. You're conflating direct democracy with democracy in general.

>California going red
I guarantee that'll never happen again.

I hate my state, please nuke us

Jesus Christ, is the Bush the worst president of States?

>look what all these poorly educated people that lived in fear of the USSR decided

Yea. Not surprised. Ignorant, fearful citizens can't be expected to make smart choices.

>don't had fear of Warsaw pact

no

pic related

he was from California

What's bad about Trump?

He was from the midwest somewhere originally.

Mondale was the only U.S. politician to ever run on a platform of increasing taxes and reducing government spending. No wonder he got killed.

Clinton had the good sense to reach across the isle and so didn't hamstring the govenment with bullshit partisan politics. Getting Dems and Repubs to work together can work wonders, like balance the federal budget. The strong economy certainly favored that, but Obama's administration would have had zero chance even with the same windfall. Him and Bush Jr. have been utter retards and Bill's wife would have been no better.

I always thought it was a good thing the worst president in my life would have happened early on so that my prime years would always be positive or at least better than youth.

I will wait until September 2017 to answer that question now, but ain't got much hope.

Don't play dumb with me you cunt

Well, at least I'm not Californian.

In recent memory? Without question.

Even right-wingers have almost completely disavowed him

Bush was shit, but there's hardly any difference between Bush and Obama.

>both multiplied the national debt
>both played world police in the Middle East because of Saudi/Israeli orders
>both expanded unconstitutional government surveillance

>t. some libcuck with zero education on american foreign policy the middle east or whatever

I swear literally all of you are embarrassments. perhaps if all of you weren't so poorly informed and educated you could actually make objective analysis. but nah. you brainwashed free associating feel history rather than research it aspies can kys tbqh.

>What's bad about Trump?
a literal meme with no political or military experience who is known for telling people that they're fired and attacks literally whos on twitter is now one of the most powerful people in the world

>not wanting to be a Jew/Saudi warmonger stooge on the American taxpayer payroll makes you a libcuck

Top lel Schlomo

So you prefer form over substance.

glad you just proved your ignorance my dude. go sperg about how your special brand of Islamic communism has never been tried before you autistic cuck.

>it's in America's best interests to remove Israel's enemies and pump trillions of dollars and thousands of lives into retarded military campaigns we're getting nothing out of

kys

That was beautifully stated.

>securing american interests is not in america's best interest.
neck yourself my kid.

Well is that any more memetic than a half Kenyan dindu stoner whose experience consisted of being a failed lawyer and a walking minstrel show?

>JUST
>59% vs 41%
meh

no that's literally what you're doing dumbcunt. stop projecting.

>bombing countries that are no threat to us and funding people who blow us up is securing our interests

lmao

WALTER PUT DOWN THE GUN

nice non-refutation. glad your circular logic helps you suck your own penis, you pathetic libcuck

Bush, Obama and FDR share the first place.

Neither do Democrats

You're the libcuck here since you obviously want to pursue the interests of dune coons and jews rather than the interests of white people. You haven't provided a single fucking argument how was Iraq or Lybia beneficial to us, so kindly fuck off if you can't scramble to find one.

>stoner

He smoked weed the same as Bush and Clinton, but he was never a stoner

>experience

He was a member of the Illinois Senate for three terms, served as a U.S. senator for one term, was a lawyer, a community organizer, and a teacher of constitutional law at the University of Chicago. While this isn't necessarily super impressive and he's still under experienced in comparison to many past presidents, he's still leagues ahead of Trump

Why do people never judge the quality of the experience? Like imagine someone claiming he has 30 years of experience as a truck driver while forgetting to mention he also crashed 10 trucks, killed several pedestrians and destroyed hundreds of thousands of dollars in goods.

Obama was a shit lawyer and Hillary was a downright catastrophic secretary of state. In my book being unproven is leagues better than being proven to be garbage.

>implying Eisenhower wasn't the last president with relevant military experience for commander in chief
>implying Trump wasn't elected because of his lack of political background and not despite of it
Wew, check this triggered libtard, lads.

Take it outside.

>Obama was a shit lawyer

I'm not really familiar with his record. Why do you say this? Anyway, even if true, it's only one aspect of his experience

Agreed on Hillary

>Obama was a shit lawyer
from all accounts he was not a bad lawyer, however he didn't really distinguish himself other than being a Harvard law graduate

>Trump was elected for his lack of political background
That would be a valid argument in favor of "triggered libtard" if he was actually an outsider and if he hadn't already sold out on half is appointments
Between slightly underachieving yes-men and literal washington insiders how is Trump supposed to achieve anything??? If I were you I'd spend less time fist-pumping and more time making sure Trump actually does what he promised to.

The guy hasn't even spent a day in office yet. Declaring him the worst president in US history is quite a stretch.

Okay, that is 100% true.
I didn't follow the reply chain I just took issue with one statement. That being said you should be concerned with some of Trump's preliminary steps if you want him to "drain the swamp."

This. This is literally the biggest fearmongering propaganda I've ever seen.

Are you underage? Did you forget 2000? Did you forget that a good deal Americans unironically thought a muslim-terrorist was going to be sworn in in 2009 and then set up death panels through the NHA.
this "fearmongering propoganda" is pretty standard as American politics goes

Oh we're just getting started. We're in this for four, likely eight more years. The fearmongering will ramp up to eleven.

No, I'm actually old enough to remember Democrats calling Reagan and Bush LITERALLY HITLER, my dad even told me they did the same thing to Nixon as well.

I'm just astounded by the amount of horseshit the media spout about Trump, it's something to fucking behold

>he will cause a stock market crash
>he will start WW3
>he will be impeached ASAP
>he will create right wing death camps for transquadriplegic amoebas of color
>he will let Putin annex America

Literally portraying him as Satan incarnate before a single day in office. At least with Bush the real shitfest didn't start until after Afghanistan and Iraq.

Reagan was the devil, though.

Reagan was pretty milquetoast if anything. I don't get why GOP praises him like the God Emperor while the Dems view him as the Devil, he was fucking average.

>>he will let Putin annex America
kek, hadn't heard this one yet

>he will cause the stock market to crash
I only ever heard that their might be a dip in the market if he got elected, which there was, and it got corrected withing a day
>he will start ww3
i heard that about Clinton, not about Trump
>he will be impeached ASAP
thats not fearmongering, unless you mean he'll do something that will warant him getting impeached, which was extremely common rhetoric for Obama's entire presidency, so yeah, pretty standard stuff
>he will let Putin annex America
again, i've never heard it, its not a common belief and its not even reported. Obviously im privy to the left "concerns" regarding Trumps plans with Russia

>he will create right wing death camps
noone believes this and the media doens't report it
quit pretending that democrats are concerned with doomsday scenarios
the left's resistance to a Trump presidency isn't even worth talking about because it happens after EVERY election and the rhetoric is pretty damn tame compared to 2000

>Obama was a shit lawyer and Hillary was a downright catastrophic secretary of state.

Neither one of those statements is correct. But I suppose the truth matters less than memes.

>I only ever heard that their might be a dip in the market if he got elected

politico.com/story/2016/11/krugman-trump-global-recession-2016-231055
marketwatch.com/story/the-stock-market-could-crash-if-donald-trump-is-elected-2016-10-31
fortune.com/2016/11/08/donald-trump-stocks-crash/
money.cnn.com/2016/05/16/investing/mark-cuban-stocks-tank-donald-trump/
money.cnn.com/2016/09/26/investing/donald-trump-first-debate/

>i heard that about Clinton, not about Trump

express.co.uk/news/world/730440/Donald-Trump-world-war-three-will-Republic-president-elect-trigger-new-global-conflicts
huffingtonpost.com/matthew-d-taylor/donald-trumps-recipe-for-_1_b_9527534.html
dailykos.com/story/2016/5/23/1529460/-Would-Donald-Trump-start-World-War-3-by-accident-or-on-purpose-Does-it-matter
ibtimes.com/will-donald-trump-trigger-world-war-3-republican-wants-more-ships-troops-military-2443915

>he will let Putin annex America

That was a funny hyperbole on my part, but there's numerous media outlets unironically claiming Trump is a Putin's puppet / KGB agent.

He isn't even president yet.
Give the man a chance to fuck up first.

sources?

>clickbait articles that don't actually read like their titles and are just like ones from 2008
oh wow its nothing
>articles about trump starting ww3
Okay, it still doesn't change the fact that I heard the same thing about Clinton numerous times, and that similar rhetoric has been used by Americans since the cold war began.

>oh wow it's nothing
Moving the goalposts: the post lmao