We need another FDR

Fucking moron.
Dems were the conservative party until the 60s, they were undergoing a period of transition at most during that time.
You fucktards are as dumb as the people saying Republicans freed the slaves.
>against their interests
Biggest meme of the millennium. Where has decades of Democratic rule gotten Detroit and Chicago again? Meanwhile, the Southern economy is absolutely booming right now. Fucking subhuman.

>The rich in this country earned
They did.
I'm not saying they shouldn't pay taxes or whatever, but they literally earned it.

This, FDR dominated in the South.
'History board' my fucking arse.

FDR is the one who literally built a liberal coalition and brought in most of the jilted progressive republicans into the Democrat fold which is the reason why the Democrats would utterly dominate national politics for the next 50 years of American history. Look at who controlled Congress from each year from 1930 to 1990 and think on that data for a bit.

He also dominated the reactionary South and ran on a policy of explicit segregation.
He was closer to an old school populist than anything, economically centrist but socially right-wing.
Also, reminder that prohibition was a progressive policy.

I think you're attributing too much of the Democratic party line to Roosevelt's personal beliefs. FDR was a consummate politician during one of the most acute eras of crisis in American history and the race issue at the time was a distraction that paled in comparison to the economic depression and the subsequent war. It seems more illuminating to see what changes FDR personally wrought, a deliberate emphasis on progressive initiatives in the New Deal like the TVA and social security that stretched across sectarian boundaries and the inclusion of a large number of progressive including republicans into his administration.

FDR wanted to remake the Democrat party and in large measure he succeeded with a new coalition that included pronounced liberal elements.

Holy fucking shit bet you believe that his economic policy was different from Hoover's?

His cousin was the better President.

no. it was america being the only industrial power left intact after ww2, and everyone owing money to America.

Still far from perfect to say the least. Many of his policies had negative side effects including conservationism.

This this. Finally someone knows what's up. The foundations for American dominance were already built in late 19th century (when USA irreversibly overtook Great Britain in GDP) regardless of economic recessions. FDR was definitely detrimental to normal recovery.

One of the most badass presidents.

Well yeah but few people rank their presidents by this basis.

This is a massive meme.
>America experienced a massive boom because it was the only industrial power left intact
>Also everyone else experienced a massive boom despite being bombed to fuck (...except the Swedes and Swiss, and for that matter Australia and New Zealand, who don't actually exist. Oh, and then there's Japan...) because... reasons.
Macroeconomic policy choices (and cheap energy) are a far more plausible explanation.

>Roosevelt was a hero to my grandparents and they kept his picture up in their home back in the day
What does this have to do with anything?

Your uneducated, rock-soup-eating grandparents, and their immigrant neighbors, ruined america to the point where classic american ideals are now seen as "inbred".

>not everyone is an inbred trump supporting Conservashit
I bet you think you're being controversial right now. If you want friendship and praise for this tired opinion, go to any other website. You don't come here for that shit. You take your medicine and like it, newfag.

Now go watch Free To Choose on youtube.

FDR enriched the corporations wtf are you talking about. I say this as a left leaning person. Not only did NRA try to institute a corporatist system, but WWII was a ridiculous boon to corporations.

Wait a minute...this style of inflammatory writing....have the Old Trolls returned?

>Free To Choose
>anything by the memetic monetarist midget

>ah yes let's control the money supply
how will we control the money supply?
>well, we'll raise interest rates to lower the effective demand for money.
but isn't that controlling the money demand, mr. friedman? would controlling the money supply not mean restricting lending? and doesn't this all implicitly accept the fact that nobody wants to accept which is that banks create new money when they lend, rather than transferring money from savers to depositors?
>*removes you from the shadow cabinet for being unorthodox*

High school is hard, isn't it?

You haven't actually watched it, have you?

the commentary on monetarism runs as an adjunct to the attack on the dwarf, not a critique of the specific propaganda.

> Southern economy is absolutely booming right now

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_GDP_per_capita

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_economic_growth_rate

the only southern state that's doing well is Texas, and that's because of the fracking and gas boom.

The "Deep South" is doing awful, and while the Northeast didn't grow faster, they started with much higher gdp/capita, and actually pulled the gap further apart in the same time period.

Roosevelt was a sellout. We need to make everyman a king.

>Dems were the conservative party
the southern democrats were socially conservative and sometime fiscally conservative, but there were many southerners who were liberals as well. To call the Democrats "conservative" is to generalize the Southern Democrat's beliefs to the whole party, which is a huge caricature on your part if not a deliberate one to try to make some kind of "point" about politics today.
>You fucktards are as dumb as the people saying Republicans freed the slaves.
Who freed the slaves then?
>. Where has decades of Democratic rule gotten Detroit and Chicago again?
That isn't how american political parties work, you fucking imbecile. No one part of the Democratic party had a monopoly on the national party like that.

FDR didn't put limits over corporations, thats not what he's meant for.
what because he founded Social Security and the FDIC? jesus christ you're retarded.
His economic plan was working until he went back to economic conservatism in 1938.
ww2 did most of that
It was wildly different that Hoovers after his first term
this
cringe

What's wrong with conservationism

Trump won because the economy only recovered on the Left Coast and Northeast Corridor. Which is where almost all the Obama deficit spending went.

At least FDR had some sense to spend on developing the South.

The South has been economically shafted since Reconstruction.

Not realizing that the world changes and you should probably change too to adapt.

His policy resulted in several negative consequences like increased number of forrest fires. So it's not all good. Same for pure food act and trust busting. Taking into account that certain portion of people criticizing certain aspects of his policies are against any kind of government activity.

Progressives are shit though. because they want to drive change to a specific political goal.

Roosevelt's advisors modelled New Deal on Hoover's. And the second recession (one of its kind) happened in 1937. He continued with his interventionism until WWII which is a whole other category.

But overall natural parks are a good idea, yes?

Well that's news to me, seeing how the Northeast pays more in federal taxes than it receives. Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York are 3 of the biggest net contributors to the Federal budget.

Call me crazy, but I think these regions and the West Coast recovered well is because they have better educated and trained workforces who can adapt themselves to the post crash/post industrial economy, while other parts of the country were unable or unwilling to retool their economies.

I don't know maybe. Less people around when Yellowstone errupts and erradicades the entire state of Wymonig.

Roosevelt vastly increased the amount of money going into the programs and established a ton of them that Hoover never even considered. Hoover actually tried to increase taxes at one point while Roosevelt tried his hand at Keynesian economics, despite his apprehensions.

I don't agree with a lot of the progressive movement, especially socially, but I think they have a better idea than head in the sand conservatives.

Tooting the protectionist autarky meme in 2017 doesn't carry the same weight as doing so in 1945. The US is 20% of the world economy compared to 50% 70 years ago, and we are not going to come out on top in a us vs everyone else trade war.

those places could have recovered fine on their own. the money needed to go everywhere else.

the only way the South attracts new business is by offering cheaper taxes, labor, and land. Poaching economic activity from other states.

>West Coast
>better educated and trained workforces
Oregon and Washington maybe, but most of California are 85 IQ Mexicans picking oranges and dealing dope.

I wouldn't even call most Republicans, Conservative. They're more like Reeeeeegressives. Since their policy seems to be rolling things back. A Conservative would wait until society has changed naturally and then catch up. Taking a "not so fast" approach to things.

here's and idea, how about better funding for southern schools and stop cramming religious bullshit into the curriculum. That way the South can have a high skill workforce too instead of being the domestic equivalent of outsourcing to India.

It's not race to the bottom that saves economies, it's building yourself to the top.

>dealing dope
>in a legal state

>They're more like Reeeeeegressives. Since their policy seems to be rolling things back.
That's just called Reactionary you faggot.

Cocaine and meth.

there ya go
then again the westcoast is pretty economically efficient.

you realize california was built up on federal money during ww2 and the cold war?

that is why it has all those nice universities and high tech companies.

Before then, it was just a bunch of farms, fishermen, and hollywood.

Dope is not a synonym for marihuana you fucking ape, it means drugs in general.

And by "South" you mean specifically Texas and Northern Virginia. Absolutely nobody is moving to fucking Louisiana and Alabama for work.

eh hmm.

Chattanooga is doing well too. They built their own gigabit fiber optic ISP. so now they have the cheapest and fastest internet in the nation.

>Atlanta
The nigger siphon of the nation. Poor niggers from Cleveland, Chicago and Detroit are moving to Atlanta, I guess we should thank the South for that.

>Chattanooga
Some glorified hamlet

Isn't that where everyone films their TV shows and movies because its cheaper and less on fire than LA?

yes.

Yes. Atlanta is a placeholder for LA while Cleveland and St. Louis are placeholders for NYC.

You've got no right to dismiss the series as propaganda when you can't even bare to criticize a certain president's nation-changing economic policy. You're leaking pro-FDR propaganda from your tits.

No, we need another Andrew Jackson. And no the draft dodger does not count. I bet he's never even beaten an assassin half to death with a cane.

>tfw Trump pretended to be Andrew Jackson 2.0 but ended up being George Bush 3.0

Yeah, the south is actually very popular to film in. South Carolina too. There's kind of a competition between SC and Georgia over that industry and Atlanta is kicking our ass since Georgia offered more generous tax breaks to studios than the SC state legislature would

New Mexico too. Every movie set in Texas or Arizona (3:10 to Yuma, No Country for Old Men, Hell or High Water) is actually filmed in New Mexico. Breaking Bad was originally supposed to take place in Riverside California but they changed it to Albuquerque because it was cheaper to film there.

He really is George Bush Jr. 2.0, but lacking the well connected political family and the experience and advisors that brings to keep him from making dumb but meaningless mistakes. Half of his problems are caused by the fact he's stumbling over a fairly convoluted and entrenched system with a lot of moving parts - particularly when it comes to employees and staff members.

The other half of his problems is his complete fucking inability to keep his goddamn mouth shut, and the fact that people don't seperate his stream of conscious ramblings from actual policy. Something not helped by the fact he sometimes makes his stream of conscious ramblings INTO actual policy (such as with the trans-sexual ban in the military).

Never blame on malice what you can rightfully attribute to ignorance. People are far too willing to believe the man is a villain when he's, quite frankly, just a fool. Which is arguably WHY he performed so well, as that's the same appeal ("I could share a beer with him" was a huge decider in G.W.B's victory in 2000 and 2004)

I've heard that even the Hollywood armorers are getting fucked by the new gun laws they're putting into place. That probably won't help anyone wanting to film an action movie in California.

>People are far too willing to believe the man is a genius when he's, quite frankly, just a fool.
FTFY

People like Trump and Bush are getting elected only because Democrats are nominating sewer tier politicians.

>People like Trump and Bush are getting elected only because Democrats are nominating sewer tier politicians.

this is also true. Though it's not cool how they did John Kerry, he legit was a vietnam vet.

It's the fact he's audacious. An audacious fool is either a fool, or secretly a genius and no one else has yet grasped his brilliance or comprehends their spark of ingenuity. Sometimes, it's both at the same time and pure luck.

Mosty though an audacious fool is just an audacious fool, but even that alone is often more likeable than a cautious pragmatist. In fact, that was literally how Hillary set herself up in comparison to Trump - the cautious, reserved, experienced candidate. How she thought that would be effective when she had gotten blown out 8 years ago by HOPE AND CHANGE is beyond me.

>legit was a vietnam vet
So was McCain who was a complete faggot too.

America also has a cult of wealth problem, where being or having the appearance of wealth is equated to competence. A lot of shady/stupid shit done by the ultra wealthy is brushed aside because of their wealth. See celebrity sex abuse.

I think both Gore and HRC would have done a good or decent job at running the country, just not getting elected. The election system shuns competence at governing in favor of popularity.

I wonder if a Roman-style cursus honorum system would do the US a lot of good. The federal system would make it easier too. So someone has to demonstrate competence as a governor before being allowed to run for president, and to become a federal cabinet member, you have to be a state cabinet member first.

I think this would guarentee at least a minimum of competence, but then again, Dubya was a governor.

Hillary was a complete catastrophe of a politician, just the complete embodiment of evil with a pretty shit stained history. Basically the Democrat version of Roy Moore multiplied by eleven.

never 4get jim webb

Jim Webb was a true Democrat moderate, not a corporate shill while also not giving into the tranny/homo/muslim SJW retardation.

>So was McCain who was a complete faggot too.
He wasn't before he ran in 08. I'm still super fucking disturbed by what happened to him when he went against Obama and let the party bosses run his campaign.

Tell me a single good thing about McCain. In foreign policy he's the biggest warmonger America has had since WW2, and in domestic politics he's just a corporate puppet.

FDR made a number of mistakes and excessively centralized power. That doesn't mean his economic policies weren't on the whole great.
There's a reason that broadly speaking, Keynesian macroeconomic policy was retained until the oil crisis demonstrated politicians know nothing about economics. ("We increased spending to boost demand in a supply-shock recession, wtf why isn't it working!? Keynes was WRONG!") And even then, the basic message (if sadly not the proper emphasis on full employment and credit control.) had to be pilfered by the new-classical weirdos to stop the financial crisis becoming a great depression.

Good, fuck WASPs .

I'm happy to vote against the Anglo-Saxon bloc. Enjoy your minority status

That's be cause the south turned their noses up on federal aid, to make spergs like you screech in rage about coastal elites.

Every fucking time.

Fuck off It's either the kingfish or nothing

>And the second recession (one of its kind) happened in 1937
hmm yes i'm sure this was due to Keynesianism
*looks at the budget*
oh look he balanced the budget with tax rises and by cutting public works, an understandable move for boom times but stupid before recovery is secure. very interesting. almost like keynes was right.

>Dude cult of personality means he's good lmao
I bet you think Hitler was the man too

>because... reasons.
Because once the US was shit rich, it started dumping money into those bombed out shitholes to get decent markets going

ah yes, bombed out shitholes like... Sweden, Australia and New Zealand... very good.

Most of the wealth in this country is inherited, it's by very definition "not earned".

Not that it's unfair though, it's the only way the system can work.

>What is the Keating five?

>trust busting was bad
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

TAFT DIDN'T GO FAR ENOUGH VOTE BULL MOOSE 2020

An alternate history where Paul Keating won the 1996 Australian Election, thereby delivering a 5th term of Labor government? (Such as that depicted in the musical "Keating!"