Would Conservatives Have Prefered Richard Nixon

What do American conservatives think of JFK?

I agree with some of his ideas, but disagree with others. I can say that he was, in my view the last decent Democrat.Positive things he did:He was a patriot and asked citizens what we could do for America.Lowered marginal tax rates.Ended the Cuban missile crisis.Supportive towards Civil rights.Supportive of gun rights.Negative things he did:Abandoned the Cuban freedom fighters during the Bay of Pigs invasion and refused air support.Started a ground war in Vietnam even though General Douglas MacArthur told him it wasn't a good idea.Allowed the creation of public unions at the federal level to get their political support.Told people they had a “right” to a job in his political manifesto.Often disregarded the good advice of Generals and Admirals.He was the last workable Democrat. I will not ever vote for a Democrat in my life if they aren't close to JFK’s political views.However, I do think he’s is overrated and lionized because of his early and tragic death.

What have the conservatives ever done for us?

The Democrats resisted the abolition of slavery, it was driven by a Republican POTUS (Lincoln) and the Republican Party, the new Chairman of which was married to the woman (a Christian) who founded the women’s suffrage movement.The NAACP was founded by a bunch of rich white guys.The Civil Rights Act was wrestled out of committee by Republicans where the Democrats held it hostage. When voted on, more Democrats voted against it than Republicans> The same thing happened for the Voting Rights Act.When King a Lewis marched across the bridge in Selma they were met by firehoses and dogs - held by Democrats.When Reagan ran for POTUS, many of the conservative Democrat voters (Reagan Democrats) fled the Democrat Party and joined the Republicans, effectively converting all the southern states to Republican majorities in their voting profiles.The hate-filled racists and bigots of the Democrat Party still rule the party in the south. And now the same could be said of the Democrat voters nationwideWhere the liberal/left and Democrat leaders/pundits/spokespersons may accuse Republicans of hate speech, bigotry, and racism —- whenever the stuff actually rears its head in practice, it always flows from the Left.

Would Democrats have preferred President Obama to lose to Mitt Romney over Clinton to Donald Trump?

I’m not a Democrat, and I’m not even American, but I’m going to answer this…… because I am a mathematician.I believe that choosing a leader for a country is not a matter to be taken lightly. It is an important and serious duty.Unlike some people, I also believe that leadership matters. Some people say “Oh, they’re all the same”. I don’t. I believe that leaders can and do make a difference.So now, let us suppose for a moment that we attempt to quantify the effect of that leadership. Say, as a percentage, like you get in school. You know, “Billy got a 79 in Presidenting!”.And so if we did that, this question boils down to the following problem:Is (Obama’s Score) + (Trump’s Score) greater or lesser than (Romney’s Score) + (Clinton’s Score).Now, I’ll assign my (admittedly subjective) scores:Obama = 81 Romney = 70Clinton = 75Trump = 49So, let’s see.Obama + Trump is 81 + 49, or 130Romney + Clinton is 70 + 75, or 145Is 130 less than 145?You bet it is!!Ergo, I believe that Romney followed by Clinton would be superior to Obama followed by Trump.In fact, since Trump has a 49, I believe that any two presidents would be better than any other president followed by Trump.Now, you may disagree. I’m cool with that. But I believe that having a lying, pussy-grabbing tool who promises to run roughshod over the Constitution and tear up treaties is not a good thing. In fact, I think it’s very, very bad indeed.But that’s just me.Edit to add: Henry Resheto asks “Why do you assume that if Romney won in 2012 Clinton would win in 2016?”. Excellent point. Lets try:Obama + Trump is 81 + 49, or 130Romney + Romney is 70 + 70, or 140Is 130 less than 140?You bet it is!!Still better than trump.

What is the role of Richard Nixon in shaping the modern Republican Party?

Having been betrayed by the African-American vote in 1960--Nixon was the candidate with the good civil rights record, not JFK--Nixon stumped the country for Republicans for the next eight years. During those eight years, the Democrats reinvented themselves as the party of civil rights. Just as Reagan's election fell around the midpoint in the shift of the Democrats from being the war party to the party of diplomacy, Nixon's fell at about the midpoint between Republicans-as-economic-Progressives and pro-civil rights to being the party of 'states' rights' and 'religious freedom.' The latter is discriminatory, but not fundamentally racist. You could apply it to LGBTQs, Jews, Catholics, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and practitioners of Voodoo, as well.Quorans seem not to like Charlie Fortin's answer, but Nixon was much more  'Progressive' than, say, FDR. From an economic policy perspective, Reagan was also far to the Left of where we are now; he just didn't say so.Like FDR, Nixon broke the discipline of the gold standard, technically a partial default on all debts, public and private. Not that it's all on Nixon. Funding Vietnam--and much of the rest of the Cold War--off budget made the Nixon shock of 1971 inevitable by 1965 when France threatened to convert its dollar reserves to US gold. Wage and price controls soon followed. Remembering them from WWII, 75% of those polled thought they were a good idea. A few Keynesians like Milton Friedman famously disagreed, but Nixon was re-elected in a landslide.Also, Pat Nixon opened Friendship Park south of San Diego bemoaning the presence of any fence, then a single strand of wire, between the US and Mexico.What you might say then, is that Nixon was the Ur-progenitor of the modern Republican Party, much as Carter birthed the New Democrats, and that the crystalization of his policies in office inform both what they're for and against.