How the fuck did Reagan stay so popular when he was destroying the economy, social programs, and Iran-Contra shit?

How the fuck did Reagan stay so popular when he was destroying the economy, social programs, and Iran-Contra shit?

The Cold War and his strong anti communist positions

Propaganda, fed to the populace in a constant stream, designed to foster division between the proles and further decay any chance of a unified labor force (Americans as a whole) able to push back against TPTB.

He was needed at the time. Plus he didn't blame the American people for everything that went wrong like carter did.

When Iran stopped their oil companies from selling petroleum to the outside world, Carter's solution was to take it like a bitch, and go on national television to blame the American people.

It's true Americans consume way too much energy, but he was trying to make the citizenry take the blame for a foreign policy failure.

Reagan was a fraud who ruined the economy and committed treason, and should've been removed from office for Iran-Contra and an aggressive campaign of terror in Central America, but he didn't reprimand the people who gave him his job after he failed at something.

Tell the people what they want to hear "you're just fine as you are, those people are all that's wrong with the world and must be brought to heel." You become more popular than someone who wants to fix systemic problems. Really makes you think about whether democracy is the best form of organising leadership.

A democratic republic is the best form, but even it can crumble without an educated populace. Education in America continues to waste the immense potential of our youth.

>destroying the economy
He did the opposite thing pal

Just because you're not berating the voting population, doesn't mean you're necessarily lying to them or not solving the problem. Carter's problem was both to blame the people, and do nothing substantive to solve the energy crisis.

A president wasn't hired to go on national television and bitch at the public, he wasn't hired to blame and neglect responsibility. If the American people consume too much energy, you solve the problem through subtle, gradual means; reducing energy consumption is a multi-generational fight.

An intelligent leader would've gotten the world to pressure the new Islamic Iranian government into respecting the property rights of their corporations, solving the energy crisis in the short term while also beginning to move towards renewable energy slowly. Carter was not an intelligent person.

how would you pressure the iranians to respect property rights when hostility to the united states was the unifying force in otherwise extremely unstable iranian politics until the war with iraq?

how would forcing the iranians to "respect property rights" solve the energy crisis when the 1979 crisis resulted from uncertainty and not material shortages of petroleum?

He was "folksy" and he flattered idiots.

1980's Dubya

Anybody old enough here to have actually witnessed Reagan?
How does he compare to the current American president?

he knew how to handle media, he was already a celeb before presidency, trump also, but in a different way. I honestly dont think people understand politics or know what its about, its just pleb tier mentality, "HE GEWD PRESIDENT WE GON CHANGE STUFF AYY"
but reagan was good, reagan had a good ideological standpoint also, he truly represented america, who could say that obama or trump represents a ordinary citizen in usa?

well the things u put out as "terror in central america" and "ruined the economy" is subjective, i think he did g00d, kill dem gommis

Obama seemed like a cool fella

>some shit three decades ago
Get over it, fagit.

The Reagan phenomenon was incredibly important, largely dependent on his own charisma, a successful economy, and external factors such as the economic chaos of the socialist world and Thatcher's defeat of organized labor.

What Reagan did, and no subsequent candidate has been able to recreate, was:

1. To associate the right-wing with ideals of freedom instead of ideals of control
2. To convince a large section of the working class that their perspective should be advancement rather than empowerment

These two, interrelated successes laid the foundation for the modern Republican party and jolted American political discourse to the right. Outside of some social issues like gay marriage and reproductive rights, post-Reagan Democrats have all been more right-wing than than their predecessors. While Bernie Sanders was still a bona fide radical in the context of US politics, in 1970 his ideas would have been met with lot less pushback from electoral Democrats.

on the history board, jesus man...

Nobody wants to be talked down to by their president.

Obama did the same thing and I didn't care for it.

yeah who cares that the people we support are raping nuns, they murdered communists

Can't make an egg without raping some chickens.

The Contras were unambiguously worse than the Sandinistas. Basically Syrian rebels without an ideological core desu

>What Reagan did, and no subsequent candidate has been able to recreate, was:
>1. To associate the right-wing with ideals of freedom instead of ideals of control
>2. To convince a large section of the working class that their perspective should be advancement rather than empowerment

How'd he do that exactly?

Charisma, rhetoric, and riding off an unpopular social Democratic presidency.

Reagan cleverly and carefully explained that traditional Democratic policies, like labor protection and civil rights, were unnecessary impositions on Americans that made our society less free. Domestically, he was something of a proto-Libertarian, and his presidency was largely driven by lassez-faire radicals who pushed for lower taxes and lower domestic spending at any cost.

If America went to war with every ally whose soldiers had raped somebody WWIII would have broken out by now

How can someone possibly not like Reagan? He combined the correctness of being right wing with the niceness of being left wing

Yeah, taking up arms to resist a communist takeover of their country, what a bunch of cunts amirite?

Their ideological core was opposing communism

The Sandinistas had some marxist ideas but the economy was mixed in effect. They weren't real communism - which is why they actually worked and made substantial improvements to their country.

He was president in the 90s before TV was invented so nobody could tell the people what was going on.

>Oil crisis comes up
>Carter rightfully finds a way to fix this by reducing oil consumption and asking for alternative green energy like Solar
>People driving gas guzzling cars that would get around 10-15 mpg average
>Republicans cry about how being energy efficiency is killing American jobs

Daily reminder that Carter LITERALLY did nothing wrong

They were mercenaries by and large. Some of them might have had strong capitalistic convictions

Tactical nukes.

Yeah, no, that's not at all how it happened.

Jesus Christ Carter wrecked our economy. Reagan saved america after 20 plus years if shitty leaderdhip.

>LITERALLY did nothing wrong
Cuban refugee crisis.

don't forget he was shot. sympathy points

>tfw can't tell if talking about present or past
we should have listened to huxley

this, but applied to the entire duration of mankind.

>Really makes you think about whether democracy is the best form of organising leadership.
Monarchy via divine rights to the Hapsburg dynasty when?

Iranian hostage crisis

Literally everyone on this thread is talking out of their ass

Same reason Obama's still popular. The damage he did won't appear for like 20 years after his term.

He was something of an absent minded buffoon as opposed to the current president who should be residing in a padded room.

>What is the Savings and Loan Crisis
>What was the start of the Mortgage Backed Security
>Neutered labor unions into oblivion
I can keep going...

You have to remember that it was much easier to feed the population a load of bullshit back in the day.

Now we have instant access to gorillions of articles from around the world from big multinational new agencies to some slob writing his blog in his basement.

Back then you got your news from the paper or watched it on TV which could have easily been manipulated.

Also he hated commies which was a big plus. He could have taken a big steaming shit on somebody's grandma and said it was to fight communism.

>but even it can crumble without an educated populace
To help matters one party is dead set on reducing spending on educating and just approved someone who hates public schools in charge of education.