What WeirdTF said just below your question. Plus Reagan was well read. He understood what the Framers set up for us and he was very principled about keeping it. Like the Framers said, they gave us "a republic, if you can keep it.".....with inalienable rights given to us by God and with a Judeo-Christian foundation. Liberty under law, belonging to we the people. No cult of personalities. No king. The were anti-tyranny, pro separation of powers with a balance of that power between 3 co-equal branches..., limited government, etc.
That's what I mean. What I do not mean is a strongman Donald Duck to save us from all our perceived evils. I do not mean the leftist ideal of bigger and bigger tyrannical government under a "living constitution" where the judges get to amend the constitution according to their likes and dislikes rather than we the people doing it the Constitutional way. IOW, not judicial tyranny. Not executive tyranny. Not Washington tyranny.
Thanks. I didn't ask the question for no reason. For years I've seen many posters talking about Reagan style conservatism or constitutional conservatism, and unfortunately they didn't all come out the same. I will always have an appreciation for Reagan who followed through on his goal of bringing down the Soviet Union. It was his leadership at a time when America was deep in a malaise over the economy, Iran, and general disgust with the outgoing Carter Administration.
He was not a fiscal conservative by any means and started a trend that has continued to this day of borrow now pay later. He didn't shrink the government; he compromised with Congress, and signed the 1986 immigration bill that led to the immigration debates we've had for the past ten years. As he later said, he kept the right wing at bay, those who considered themselves the true conservatives.
In spite of all of it though he set an example for leaders that followed, though none have met the standard, save for Bush 43 in the aftermath of 9/11. He wasn't perfect by any means, but there's a reason the candidates of today try (without success) to compare themselves to him.
