None of your assertions are true. FDR's policies didn't make the depression worse. Even his most stalwart critics don't make that claim, rather they claim it slowed down the recovery, which is only an opinion in and of itself. He didn't get us into WWII, Hitler and Hirohito did that. And the media of the 30's weren't in the pockets of the liberals. There was an abundance of anti FDR media in existence. Basically what you are saying is that what came to be know as the greatest generation began as a bunch of fools.Under FDR's leadership, or lack of it, in an astonishing three terms the downturn in the economy under Hoover became a man killing, soup line, bodies in ditches depression. FDR's policies only made it worse until he managed to get us into a war which we weren't prepared for either.
So why did the American people vote for FDR four times in a row, and why have different sets of the America's best historians rated FDR as one of three best American presidents since 1948. And worse, recently rated FDR as America's best president? Besides the usual "historians are commies," do you have any other explanation that doesn't sound uneducated?
During the 30's the radio media and the print media was in the back pocket of liberal democrats. The media was the propaganda arm of the FDR administration and the poor fools who were struggling with the depression heard only promises of good times by a corrupt administration.
There simply was no "abundance" of anti-FDR media during the 30's. Every single mainstream print media or radio station was supportive of FDR policies during the 30's or risk losing their FCC license..
Never heard of Charles Coughlin huh? It didn't get more "abundant" than that-- you could literally just walk down the street and hear his voice from other people's radios. You didn't even need your own. At least 30 million listeners. Even Lush Rimjob doesn't claim that big an audience today.