I agree!
We had a popular Conservative as POTUSA.
Next was a one term moderate.
Next was a two term traitor, who some people think was conservative.
Next was a two term moderate that squeaked by because the democrats nominees were very bad.
Now some people want a far left winger as the Republican nominee that most real democrats can beat because they can run to the right of IT.
I noted you sorta kinda referred to Rudy JulieAnnie as "IT", since "It's" into cross-dressing, I'll sorta kinda concur....;-)
"
We had a popular Conservative as POTUSA.
Next was a one term moderate.
Next was a two term traitor, who some people think was conservative.
Next was a two term moderate that squeaked by because the democrats nominees were very bad.
Now some people want a far left winger as the Republican nominee that most real democrats can beat because they can run to the right of IT."
You are rapidly becoming one of my very favorite FReepers!
You've nailed it!
Your analysis of the Presidents since Carter (thankfully excluded) is spot-on. Sad that many don't recognize 41 and 43 as what they are.
Sign me up for the Freeper Party. Jim Robinson for POTUS!
That might be somewhat oversimplified and debatable, assuming you are referring to Reagan as the former, and Bush 1 as the latter. Reagan had a chance to reshape the courts for decades to come. SDO was selected while we had a GOP majority. Yes, Kennedy came after 2 conservatives were defeated by a Dem senate. And Scalia has been great.
But the way I see it, is that Reagan got 1 out of 3 right, when he should have gotten at least 2 right, since there is no excuse for SDO. Bush 1 gave us the best justice maybe ever in Clarence Thomas. He also gave us Souter, so, OUCH! But 1 out of 2 is better than 1 out of 3. As for Bush 2 being a 2 term moderate, well, he is so far 2 for 2, giving us a legitimate chance of restoring constitutional sanity.
It does not matter how many elections we win if we allow a social activist court to usurp our self government. So, yes, I am one of those that think that SCOTUS nominations is the primary consideration when determining the label I place on a POTUS.
Don't get me wrong, I loved and admired Reagan. He did things for the judiciary in the lower courts and his staffing that set up our current opportunities (ala Roberts) for reform. I remember crying as a 10 year old boy when he left office.
Also, Reagan and Bush 2 have something in common that makes us all cringe. Amnesty for illegals. It happened then, and it is going to happen again.
I don't think there is enough evidence to call one a conservative, and another a moderate. They are a mixed bag for sure, but no doubt better than the Dem alternatives at any given time.
You think Ronald Reagan was a traitor?