[FAA]

My dear God, man, this is so ridiculous.

I was talking a pol running on that platform TODAY. Not Reagan running on that platform 30 years ago.

I didn’t call his Presidency a failure. I said it was not what a lot of us hoped it could have been.

And, seriously, this is too stupid to argue about. You don’t understand what I’m saying and I can’t explain it to. Stop it. Just stop.

[ansel12]

Yep-growth of government, amnesty for illegals, Iran-Contra, Anthony Kennedy. It’s almost like he was a “compassionate conservative” which is a term I think just about everyone right-of-center hates these days. A damn sight better than any alternative at the time but far from the ideal conservative Presidential material we are searching for today. Any candidate, today, who tried to win the GOP primary on the platform of above would be shouted down and out as an appeaser, a squish, “eastablishment, and, moderate.
"I was talking a pol running on that platform TODAY. Not Reagan running on that platform 30 years ago."

Nobody is running on that platform, Reagan didn't run on that platform, you keep attacking Reagan's presidency.

You did call him a failure.

Best Presidency of my life? You. Bet. What I want to see from the next “conservative” elected to office? If any GOP/conservative POTUS of the future signed another amnesty or failed to significantly reduce the size and scope of government we would be here talking about them as a failure, no?"

Reagan's presidency was not a failure, and why do you want to keep ranting against him and some fake "platform"?

Why try to turn this into an anti-Reagan thread?