Spyke
SippyCupreply
feddit.nl

"Oh my God, Still just an actor Ronald Reagan you're in danger!"

"What do you mean still just an-"

29
SippyCupreply
feddit.nl

"somebody shot Ronald Reagan!"

"Who?"

"The Boraxo cleaner commercial guy!"

"Again I ask, who??"

3
Godricreply
lemmy.world

Shoot, this is a particularly rough time to discover that

45

I'm not sure it helps, but just know that there are plenty of cis-hets out there willing to use our privilege to fucking rage on your behalf.

8

Feeling cute, might also keep that sob Kissinger from dying peacefully in his sleep.

24
Godricreply
lemmy.world

You expect a senile old man to use proper grammar?

33
lemm.ee

It is so strange. After the Republicans turned a depression into the Great Depression with tariffs and then Watergate, it seemed like they were no longer relevant. Then Reagan came along, and was an extremely liberal conservative. Reagan "invented" the no fault divorce so that couples would no longer have to sue each other and declare one of them at fault. The republican party should have went extinct at Bush Episode 1... "read my lips, no new taxes" (he lied and was a one term president because of it).

Then Bush Episode 2, who was a complete idiot ... then Trump. Why? How can this stupid corrupt party still be relevant?

33
Bouzoureply
lemmy.world

Religion. They are the "Christian party."

I mean, literally none of their actions reflect the teachings of Christ, but culturally they have entrenched themselves as the only religion Christians can choose (at least, from the view of many Christians).

20
Wilcoreply
lemm.ee

I'm not very religious ... and most "conservatives" are a bit to unchristian and evil for my taste. A greedy drug fueled billionaire with 13+ kids by who-knows-how-many mother's should not be relevant in "conservative" politics, but there he is. We will not discuss how/why they tolerate Trump ... that makes even less sense.

They aren't conservative, they are fascist.

7

Truly. Trump and his ilk are like if you made the antithesis of Christ's teachings in lab...

2
lemmy.world

Reagan wasn't Liberal by any stretch. He was economically Libertarian except for when he tariffed nations like Japan and he promoted gun control when the black panthers started making headlines.

9
Wilcoreply

No fault divorce was a very VERY liberal concept.

2

TBF if security were more lax and Trump's Itinerary were more accessible then we might be talking. Looking up all the places and times Reagan was is trivial.

Though I suppose you could travel forwards and then backwards but I think the hypothetical implies we don't have a time machine to use against the present tyrant?

2
lemm.ee

You would need to target Jude Wanniski (conservative economist). Reagan wasn't the one who came up with supply side economics though he was an effective face of the message, reviving the Republican Party from its loss of credibility due to Nixon.

Part of it is just unbridled American level greed though. America has a good thing going post WW2, having horded 80% of the worlds gold supply by selling weapons to allies and staying out of the war until instigated by Japan in '41.

Also had a good thing going with the New Deal which helped pull the economy out of the great depression and bolstered / introduced many of the public services that are still in use today.

But no, dangle some marginal tax cuts in front of common folk who have the best standard of living in the world and apparently they'll vote for acceleration toward end stage capitalism.

17

Conservative policies need a (🤢) charismatic celebrity to connect with people and convince them to vote to destroy the country. DeSantis could never be this effective.

I have no idea how Trump, of all people, is so charismatic, but I'm not a racist.

5
retrolemmy.com

That's pretty unrealistic. No girl has come close to shooting a president since Ford was in office.

8
lemmy.world

What I'm hearing is that we can't elect a woman president but that other notable milestones related to the presidency are up for grabs.

24
slrpnk.net

Reagan was a fucking actor that was reading lines, shooting him would have done nothing. They'd just find a new electable moron to read the party's script.

5

If I had a time machine, I'd kill whoever at NBC greenlit The Apprentice. That's what started this ball rolling.

4

Same can be said about Hitler , well painter then. Wouldn't have stopped the war anyhow. Still worth doing

3
lemm.ee

George H. W. Bush is now president! Huh...didn't really change much.

3
TheFoganreply
programming.dev

Well I mean a lot could... George H Bush failed to be popular enough for re-election, so really it's a total shift in everything, and possibly effectiveness of what gets implimented.

8
samus12345reply
lemm.ee

I suppose it also depends on when Reagan gets offed. 1981 would be a lot different than 1988.

Of course, the smart move is to assassinate the person BEFORE they're in a position of power.

5
TheFoganreply
programming.dev

Agreed, even with a time machine... secret service would make it quite difficult. Obviously the morality of killing baby hitler is always a thing.

Really though more morally though you probably could prevent most politicians from being politicians non lethally. Break into the hospital, swap him with another baby. It's a combination of nature and nurture so... if you change the upbringing, he probably won't wind up president.

5
samus12345reply
lemm.ee

One suggestion I've seen regarding Hitler is getting him when he was a runner in WWI. Nobody would question another casualty.

As far as modern evil people go, making sure that baby in a hospital in Queens in 1946 doesn't go to a rich family would almost certainly prevent a lot of future suffering. He's a born narcissist and would always be an asshole, but without rich parents propping him up he likely wouldn't have gone anywhere of note. He's not nearly smart enough to have made it on his own.

6
harmsyreply
lemmy.world

TIL Dubya, Slick-Willie, and Donnie Moscow were all born in the same year.

2

Just make sure he gets in to art school.

No one pays attention to artists.

3
SippyCupreply
feddit.nl

George Bush likely lost because Ross Perot split the vote.

4

And the response was that we should really fix this messed up voting system we have.

3

You could just hop back through time doing this, and no one could ever catch you at the end because you hadn't even committed those crimes yet

2