One of the silliest quotes I have seen here. Reagan would mop up and I would campaign and vote for him every day of the week.

He wouldn't win as a Governor in CA however, because that state is so far gone now.

Bizzaro world is holding up Christie or Kasich as "Reaganesque" when those two are about the furthest from him. You need to go back to school. Cruz is the closest thing we have to a Reagan in this go round and it is sad you don't see it.



responsible for national losses? Did you not see the landslides in favor of republicans? And this was not because of the Rove candidates (read establishment republicans). Many many of these candidates ran as conservatives and won. So I don't get your "national losses" argument, when the opposite is true.

Reagan would not horse trade with a socialistic minded party like the democrats are now. He would explain his case and again force the democrats to move right. I have never said ''no compromise ever." But if compromising, means always the republicans moving further left, then hell yeah, I am for no compromise ever in a situation like that. Why go further left toward socialism?
We are not Europe.

The president shuts down the government, not the congress- THE PRESIDENT- the government cannot be shut down by congress.

Obama is responsible for the government shut down. As he was THE PRESIDENT.. got that?

BTW, Carter shut down the government 5 times.

Reagan 8 times.

and when the government shuts down, is anyone really affected? Non essential government does not shut down and 83% of government was considered essential and was still NOT SHUT DOWN in the last shut down.

The government shuts down every weekend and on national holidays and how on earth do we "peons" cope with life?

"Oh mercy help me lordy! I can't function without big brother telling me what to do! Where are my pants? Who is going to tell me what to eat? A lightbulb in my home is out.. which type is government telling me to use? Why oh why can't I function?"

We all rejoice when the DMV and the Post office again reopens, so we can breathe a sigh of relief that all is right with the world.

Carter or Obama never got shot either... 🤐

Pretty sure that O'Reilly said that raygun was already senile by the time that he was shot.
Nancy took care of things after that.

Good astrologists are hard to find these days.

T-ball needs a better astrologist and maybe a psychiatrist too.

Where did I say anything about Christie or Kasaich? Argue with yourself much?

Reagan did horse trade. Period. And he won. He was good at it. Saying he wouldn't now is convenient but it would mean him being totally different than he was which is sort of the point. Reagan dealt with the other side, negotiated and normally won. It's part of what made him great. He engaged and buried them with ideas and ambition. He didn't just bury his head and say no. He didn't capitulate and had his line, but Cruz isn't worthy of washing his taint. Cruz is a flash in the pan one dimensional lightweight. An asterisk. To compare him to Reagan is an insult to Reagan. Simply being a no guy is easy. Reagan did not take the easy path. The only thing in common is they are/were not the preferred establishment guy. But neither is Elmer Fudd.

Reagan was multidemsional and not simply against things. He was actually quite positive rather than negative. As a small minion it was quite fun to work for his campaign. I'm not sure what I could learn about him in school that I didn't learn from experience during the campaigns in Iowa but I'm willing to try. I do value higher learning as long as it's not revisionist.

Teddy there really is only one national election others are statewide or regional. so no I've not seen republican landslides by any republicans in quite some time with the possible exception of a Rove second termer and the reasons for that are interesting and include a sh1tty dem candidate. The fact you don't get it isn't a surprise. It jives with your skewed view of my favorite contemporary President and the first campaign I ever worked on.

And in the 80s, just like now, there certainly were some extremely wacky socialist lib types to deal with, which he did, and he schooled them. He also dealt with them socially at times over drinks before during and after the deal. He did not make them the enemy to be opposed at every turn. He recognized the enemy was beyond our borders not within. His political opponents were simply wrong on some things not evil or misintentioned. Hijacking his name pisses me off.

Too bad he was wrong.

The socialist frog has been boiling, and the broth is getting more concentrated.

Lol. They should be cooked soon.

I think we're going from braise to deep fried.

He chose the things he would/could not waiver on and didn't. He also chose the things he would like to have or not have and put them as chits on the table. Then he played the game and usually won. But without a willingness to lose a few chits you can't win and are not even playing the game.

Rush used to take issue with that all the time when it was contemporary. Rush is an entertainer not someone who must govern a diverse country. I still remember the ronaldus Maximus stitchk being created just because it riled the libs who hated Ronnie because he kept beating them at the game.

You gotz a boner for Rush.

Fact is part of the Repubs want what Soetoro and the left fringe want they just don't want their names on it. What legislation has the Dog Eater wanted he hasn't gotten? Gun control? HIS fuggin VA is mislabeling thousands of Veterans that now cannot own firearms. His DOJ has ran entrapment efforts on others.....sorry back on point. Show me where the left compromises? Please, I'll listen. But Rush is right about the controlling faction of the left using Alinsky tactics.

See what I did there? I brought it back to him so you could have a happy ending.

They way to beat them is to engage them armed with better ideas.

The campus stuff trying to kill expression of opposing view points that are not pc or racially approved is dangerous. Why fear the opposing view if yours is superior? But the same is true on the other side of the coin. When did we become such self absorbed mind numbed wussies that demand our way or else?

I used to listen to rush all the time. I could listen to him at work at the time and rarely missed him for several years. I have nothing against him. I got bored with his act though. He is what he is. An entertainer. A good one too. He's no different than Moore, Stewart, maher etc. And if you listen enough to some it will get old. Meh.

The libs are worse but they always have been. That doesn't mean you can **** the bed and say it doesn't stink. If you want to be like them that's fine but let's not pretend differently. Reagan didn't want to be like them nor was he scared of them.

There are things that could get done if someone blinks first and the other blinks back. Then the game is on. Win it.

I can't take your premise, because of the lefts tactics it's a new battle.

Not much in politics is truly new.

Someone needs to take the high road and lead. I don't see that person in either party and indeed it's discouraged in both. But ultimately one will emerge or we will simply deteriorate as stubborn dumb asses. My guess is we deteriorate untim one must emerge or we become more multi party which in the end requires more compromise. That's not all bad or good. It just is.

That said if the current strategy works for both parties why change?

Just like a stone wheel and a Bugatti wheel are the same.