Was Nixon a Socialist?

Jarod

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
The radical whacko portion of the Republican party, about 35% of it, is calling Presidnet Obama any name they can come up with... but one they use mostly is SOCIALIST.....

They are misunderstanding the scale and range of political pholosophy, but I wonder:


Do they belive Nixon to be a socialist? Nixon, who under the advice of Alan Greenspan (first appointed to chairman of the fed reserve under Regan) instituted price controls on many common goods!

Nixon led the government to limit private companies what they chould charge for goods! Does that sound like Capitolism? Does that make Nixon a socialist? Should we print out signs with Nixon's face on them, cross out the word LIAR and replace it with SOCIALIST?
 
Yes. Nixon was a "progressive", or what passes for budding socialism in this particular nation. His price fixing created many of the problems faced by Carter, unfortunately Carter was entirely (even with his vaunted IQ) incapable of managing the issues he wound up facing and therefore lost after just 4 short years as President to a more capable leader who faced those challenges with large success.
 
Damocles said:
Yes. Nixon was a "progressive", or what passes for budding socialism in this particular nation. His price fixing created many of the problems faced by Carter, unfortunately Carter was entirely (even with his vaunted IQ) incapable of managing the issues he wound up facing and therefore lost after just 4 short years as President to a more capable leader who faced those challenges with large success.
Click to expand...

I see the result differently, I belive that the economy was already improving due to the excellent management of president Carter, however like a large ship, it takes time to turn such a thing around. The Voting public then, as now, has an attention span that does not allow for waiting for policies to have there effect, they only want action NOW. Even such, had Iran chosen to release the hostages prior to the election Carter would clearly have won. The Iranians knew they held the cards and effectivly chose Regan over Carter.

Regan then suffered a bad economy for the start of his presidency and eventually the changed Carter effecuated eventually began having there effect and Regan was glorified for the work Carter did!
 
Jarod said:
I see the result differently, I belive that the economy was already improving due to the excellent management of president Carter, however like a large ship, it takes time to turn such a thing around. The Voting public then, as now, has an attention span that does not allow for waiting for policies to have there effect, they only want action NOW. Even such, had Iran chosen to release the hostages prior to the election Carter would clearly have won. The Iranians knew they held the cards and effectivly chose Regan over Carter.
,r
Regan then suffered a bad economy for the start of his presidency and eventually the changed Carter effecuated eventually began having there effect and Regan was glorified for the work Carter did!
Click to expand...

That's an interesting perspective. So the economy was improving while Carter was President but then dipped into a deep recession after he left office but then a couple of years later started roaring because of what Carter did several years prior.
 
Jarod said:
I see the result differently, I belive that the economy was already improving due to the excellent management of president Carter, however like a large ship, it takes time to turn such a thing around. The Voting public then, as now, has an attention span that does not allow for waiting for policies to have there effect, they only want action NOW. Even such, had Iran chosen to release the hostages prior to the election Carter would clearly have won. The Iranians knew they held the cards and effectivly chose Regan over Carter.

Regan then suffered a bad economy for the start of his presidency and eventually the changed Carter effecuated eventually began having there effect and Regan was glorified for the work Carter did!
Click to expand...

you are seriously deluded.

here is your roaring carter economy.

1970s_gasLines.jpg
 
Jarod said:
I see the result differently, I belive that the economy was already improving due to the excellent management of president Carter, however like a large ship, it takes time to turn such a thing around. The Voting public then, as now, has an attention span that does not allow for waiting for policies to have there effect, they only want action NOW. Even such, had Iran chosen to release the hostages prior to the election Carter would clearly have won. The Iranians knew they held the cards and effectivly chose Regan over Carter.

Regan then suffered a bad economy for the start of his presidency and eventually the changed Carter effecuated eventually began having there effect and Regan was glorified for the work Carter did!
Click to expand...

:rofl:

:lol:
 
cawacko said:
That's an interesting perspective. So the economy was improving while Carter was President but then dipped into a deep recession after he left office but then a couple of years later started roaring because of what Carter did several years prior.
Click to expand...

Yes, I belive that most of the policies Carter instituted were not Quick Fixes, they were fundamental changes in direction that took 2 to 3 even 4 years to take hold and result in signifigant results.
 
Presidents and Congresses have a very limited effect on the larger economy, what effect they do have shows up after a signifigant lag.

They can do things very short term that have a short term effect.... but real turnarounds due to policy changes take several years to show up.
 
Jarod said:
I see the result differently, I belive that the economy was already improving due to the excellent management of president Carter, however like a large ship, it takes time to turn such a thing around. The Voting public then, as now, has an attention span that does not allow for waiting for policies to have there effect, they only want action NOW. Even such, had Iran chosen to release the hostages prior to the election Carter would clearly have won. The Iranians knew they held the cards and effectivly chose Regan over Carter.

Regan then suffered a bad economy for the start of his presidency and eventually the changed Carter effecuated eventually began having there effect and Regan was glorified for the work Carter did!
Click to expand...
IMO, This is an example of how people often desperately search for justification of their beliefs and are willing to accept any ridiculous scenario that might give credence to what they already believe rather than just looking at what actually happened.

Nixon's progressive policy caused problems for our nation, which remained problems due to Carter's inept leadership. Too bad IQ by itself doesn't translate to good policy and strong leadership.
 
Jarod said:
Presidents and Congresses have a very limited effect on the larger economy, what effect they do have shows up after a signifigant lag.

They can do things very short term that have a short term effect.... but real turnarounds due to policy changes take several years to show up.
Click to expand...

it's astounding that hardcore libs, like yourself, only hold this view when the economy doesn't work so well for a dem president.
 
Jarod said:
Yes, I belive that most of the policies Carter instituted were not Quick Fixes, they were fundamental changes in direction that took 2 to 3 even 4 years to take hold and result in signifigant results.
Click to expand...

any particular policy(ies) come to mind?
 
He was the one who created the Department of Energy and the one who introduced conservation. A lot of his far reaching ideas did not pass in the Senate, but he did start the ball rolling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top