> No, what was a disaster was the economic policies that proceeded Reagan. I think you have to be a bit more specific here, otherwise you're just blowing hot a

> No, what was a disaster was the economic policies that proceeded Reagan. I think you have to be a bit more specific here, otherwise you're just blowing hot air without anything worth discussing. I provided several reasons and sources to why I think that the Reagan presidency failed in the long run - do you care to examine and response to any of that? > You realize he was elected with some of the biggest pluralities A vast majority of the US population supported going to war against Iraq in 2003. Turns out this was an unmitigated disaster that has repercussions until today. It is one of the reasons - just for example - that the U.S. and coalition actions in Afghanistan failed. Just because a plurality of people agrees to a thing, it doesn't mean we cannot look back and find out that we were wrong. > Clearly the voters (on both sides) benefited. I'm not sure I follow your line of reasoning. Just because the Nigerian scammer got you to transfer the funds that doesn't mean you benefited, right?