The Great Depression in a nutshell

gipper

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2011
65,204
34,574
2,605
Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal


At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
 
As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.

Jim's spot on

Anecdotally , i was on an Obama shovel ready job for over a year.

What happens to your federal dollar when it comes to town is over the top cronyism & corruption , followed by local politicians taking credit for what appears as an economic uplift to their communities

All led by, invited in, and sheltered via the bloody do gooder organizations

Said job saw 1/2 dz local sm biz bankrupcies , dozens of liens ,and eventually gub'mit paying us so much on the dollar to stfu

NO press , even the radical ones, touched it....none nada zip zero

~S~
 
And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?
I can hardly write a book about the Great Depression or the lead-in to WWII, but I remember some of it, and I have also seen documentaries on the contributing dust bowl. But mostly I remember the kitchen table talks at home (in Michigan). My family was grateful to FDR. During the war was also a time when Americans pulled together. The business owner car-pooled with his secretary and the janitor. My mom bought me Buster Brown shoes instead of the sharp ones I wanted because they were rationed and I could only have one pair so it had to be the practical ones. At home sugar was rationed so it was sorted into individual named containers, and if we used more than our share...tough luck, we ate our Corn Flakes without it. We saved newspapers, tin foil off gum wrappers, Lucky Strike packaged in OD green, gas & oil and new tires were out of the question and most of all, there were stars in nearly every window. I didn't know we were under restrictions though. EVERYONE shared the burden.

I guess I'm like the confederate that insists new history is wrong in the reasons for secession that I scorn, because I resent the rewrite of the depression that is contrary to my memories. Oklahoma for example, red to the bone, took the helping hand the Feds extended. CCC built beautiful as well as useful projects, and sent a percentage of the paychecks to workers home. Hoover Dam, Mt Hood lodge, the hated TVA...all weren't just 'busy work' and none of which we would not today have without the feds.

So I don't much like the contemporary scorn of an era I remember as saving dignity.
 
And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?
I can hardly write a book about the Great Depression or the lead-in to WWII, but I remember some of it, and I have also seen documentaries on the contributing dust bowl. But mostly I remember the kitchen table talks at home (in Michigan). My family was grateful to FDR. During the war was also a time when Americans pulled together. The business owner car-pooled with his secretary and the janitor. My mom bought me Buster Brown shoes instead of the sharp ones I wanted because they were rationed and I could only have one pair so it had to be the practical ones. At home sugar was rationed so it was sorted into individual named containers, and if we used more than our share...tough luck, we ate our Corn Flakes without it. We saved newspapers, tin foil off gum wrappers, Lucky Strike packaged in OD green, gas & oil and new tires were out of the question and most of all, there were stars in nearly every window. I didn't know we were under restrictions though. EVERYONE shared the burden.

I guess I'm like the confederate that insists new history is wrong in the reasons for secession that I scorn, because I resent the rewrite of the depression that is contrary to my memories. Oklahoma for example, red to the bone, took the helping hand the Feds extended. CCC built beautiful as well as useful projects, and sent a percentage of the paychecks to workers home. Hoover Dam, Mt Hood lodge, the hated TVA...all weren't just 'busy work' and none of which we would not today have without the feds.

So I don't much like the contemporary scorn of an era I remember as saving dignity.
Propaganda about the greatness of FDR, doped millions of Americans. Still does to this day, sadly. FDR was an economic illiterate, but he was a great politician. This means he was a prodigious liar and terribly corrupt.
 
The purpose of the New Deal was to do more than accelerate the end of the Depression it was to ease the suffering of the people

It was more about getting money to the people than getting money to the banks

As FDR said, People don’t eat on the long run, they have to eat every day
 
Last edited:
Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal


At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
My mother and father both lived through the Great Depression as they were both still in their preteens when it happened. They remember the long lines at the food stores, expensive gas, and other commodities that just were available, because most people lost hope for a better life. Does that sound like some 1/2 white fagot who promised Hope and Change, but soon talked about unemployment was the new norm? But as typical of US citizens, my family was able to tighten up the bootstraps, and weather through the malaise that FDR brought upon the states. The revision of History has been the whole concept of the Marxist left, because since they have taken the media and public education, they can say what ever they want, and most of the dumbass left will believe it. Here are some examples.

https://nypost.com/2015/06/26/how-the-left-rewrites-history-and-defames-the-south/
Setting the Record Straight: American History in Black & White by David Barton

If the blacks ever found out how duped they were by the progs, they would be out burning down the houses of said progs...
 
And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?
I can hardly write a book about the Great Depression or the lead-in to WWII, but I remember some of it, and I have also seen documentaries on the contributing dust bowl. But mostly I remember the kitchen table talks at home (in Michigan). My family was grateful to FDR. During the war was also a time when Americans pulled together. The business owner car-pooled with his secretary and the janitor. My mom bought me Buster Brown shoes instead of the sharp ones I wanted because they were rationed and I could only have one pair so it had to be the practical ones. At home sugar was rationed so it was sorted into individual named containers, and if we used more than our share...tough luck, we ate our Corn Flakes without it. We saved newspapers, tin foil off gum wrappers, Lucky Strike packaged in OD green, gas & oil and new tires were out of the question and most of all, there were stars in nearly every window. I didn't know we were under restrictions though. EVERYONE shared the burden.

I guess I'm like the confederate that insists new history is wrong in the reasons for secession that I scorn, because I resent the rewrite of the depression that is contrary to my memories. Oklahoma for example, red to the bone, took the helping hand the Feds extended. CCC built beautiful as well as useful projects, and sent a percentage of the paychecks to workers home. Hoover Dam, Mt Hood lodge, the hated TVA...all weren't just 'busy work' and none of which we would not today have without the feds.

So I don't much like the contemporary scorn of an era I remember as saving dignity.
Propaganda about the greatness of FDR, doped millions of Americans. Still does to this day, sadly. FDR was an economic illiterate, but he was a great politician. This means he was a prodigious liar and terribly corrupt.
Gipper, I see it as propaganda against the greatness of FDR. I see millions of doped Americans that weren't there reading Republican after-thought books about the long run. And any person who supports Trump and calls FDR a prodigious liar and corrupt loses credibility. Especially how an extended government shutdown is a good thing according to Republicans in the long run. There are some needs that can't wait it out.
 
Democrat administrations have always enjoyed the support of the media and pop-historians. FDR was elected with the promise of ending the economic recession but under his watch it turned into a bodies in ditches soup line "great" depression. FDR didn't have the decency to voluntarily step down after two failed terms and democrats, with the cooperation of the media, managed to lie to America and pretend that they were running a healthy president for his 4th term when they knew he was dying.
 
FDR was a Moon Bat asshole. A fucking Democrat moron that thought government could fix things.

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."
 
Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal


At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?"



considering republicans do the same thing.


"
 
Well the people that lived during the depression voted for FDR four times and that just may be an inkling of what the people thought of FDR's leadership during the depression. But wait, what of the nation's historians? Well the historians, since 1948 have named FDR as America's greatest president. So that leaves the Republicans searching for a way to create their own FDR. Maybe the best for Republicans is to elect a president that will outdo FDR. How about Trump?
 
The purpose of the New Deal was to do more than accelerate the end of the Depression it was to ease the suffering of the people

It was more about getting money to the people than getting money to the banks

As FDR said, People don’t eat on the long run, they have to eat every day

The New Deal was FDR's attempt to become his Uncle Joe
 
Well the people that lived during the depression voted for FDR four times and that just may be an inkling of what the people thought of FDR's leadership during the depression. But wait, what of the nation's historians? Well the historians, since 1948 have named FDR as America's greatest president. So that leaves the Republicans searching for a way to create their own FDR. Maybe the best for Republicans is to elect a president that will outdo FDR. How about Trump?
Putin, Maduro, keep getting elected too.....That single fact doesn't whitewash FDR's record.....
 
The crowning folly of the Hoover administration was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, passed in June 1930. It came on top of the Fordney-McCumber Tariff of 1922, which had already put American agriculture in a tailspin during the preceding decade. The most protectionist legislation in U.S. history, Smoot-Hawley virtually closed the borders to foreign goods and ignited a vicious international trade war. Professor Barry Poulson notes that not only were 887 tariffs sharply increased, but the act broadened the list of dutiable commodities to 3,218 items as well.[5]

Officials in the administration and in Congress believed that raising trade barriers would force Americans to buy more goods made at home, which would solve the nagging unemployment problem. They ignored an important principle of international commerce: trade is ultimately a two-way street; if foreigners cannot sell their goods here, then they cannot earn the dollars they need to buy here.

so are we doomed to repeat this? ~S~
 
Well the people that lived during the depression voted for FDR four times and that just may be an inkling of what the people thought of FDR's leadership during the depression. But wait, what of the nation's historians? Well the historians, since 1948 have named FDR as America's greatest president. So that leaves the Republicans searching for a way to create their own FDR. Maybe the best for Republicans is to elect a president that will outdo FDR. How about Trump?
Putin, Maduro, keep getting elected too.....That single fact doesn't whitewash FDR's record.....
 
Well the people that lived during the depression voted for FDR four times and that just may be an inkling of what the people thought of FDR's leadership during the depression. But wait, what of the nation's historians? Well the historians, since 1948 have named FDR as America's greatest president. So that leaves the Republicans searching for a way to create their own FDR. Maybe the best for Republicans is to elect a president that will outdo FDR. How about Trump?
Putin, Maduro, keep getting elected too.....That single fact doesn't whitewash FDR's record.....
Are you still talking about the United States or have you brought in another country to prove your point? Perhaps a better response is that the American Republican Party passed an Amendment to the Constitution so another Democrat was not elected more than twice. The Republicans had little hope of a Republican being voted for a third term.
 
Like so much of what is taught in government schools, the truth about Great Depression won’t be found there. This spells it out rather succinctly.



Failure of the New Deal


At the outset of the Great Depression, 1929, the unemployment rate in America was 2.9% according to U.S. Dept. of Commerce statistics. Unemployment reached its peak in 1933 at 24.9%. There was a bit of a recovery as mal-investments were liquidated, but it only dropped the unemployment rate to 14.3% by 1939. It rose to 19.0% in 1938 and was still 14.6% in 1940, on the eve of American entry into World War II. Personal consumption expenditures were still lower in 1940 ($71.9 billion) than in 1929 ($78.9 billion). All of this despite eight years of unprecedented New Deal “stimulus spending,” regulating, controlling, subsidizing, lending, inflating, price-controlling, and taxing. The New Deal was an utter failure to the American people. Economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway estimated in their book, Out of Work, that the unemployment rate was eight percentage points higher in 1940 than it otherwise would have been without New Deal minimum-wage and pro-union legislation alone.

Nor did World War II end the Great Depression. It ended high unemployment only because some 16 million men were sent overseas during the war. Sending a man to die in a foxhole in Germany is not the same as that man going to work in his own country and returning home to have dinner with his family every evening, contrary to Keynesian folklore about how the war supposedly “ended the Great Depression.” The average American family back at home was even worse off because of the massive diversion of resources from the consumer and business side of the economy to the government’s military infrastructure. The production of new automobiles and other products was made illegal, food was rationed, and everyone sacrificed even more.

The Great Depression did not really end until after the war was over and the army was demobilized, returning billions of dollars of resources to the private sector. Federal government expenditures fell from $98.4 billion in 1945 to $33 billion in 1948. As a result, the year 1946 was the most prosperous year in all of American history in terms of the growth of the private components of GDP: private consumption and investment spending increased by 30% in that one year; no other year has ever been remotely close to that growth rate. Keynesian economists predicted another Great Depression because of the two-thirds reduction in federal spending while the exact opposite happened. That should have discredited Keynesianism forever, but the Washington establishment just ignored or lied about this fact, as it does to this very day.

It took some seventy years, but the “mainstream” of the economics profession finally caught on to this truth, a truth that was recognized by Austrian School economists all along. In an August 2004 article in the prestigious Journal of Political Economy by Harold Cole and Lee Ohanian entitled “New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression” the authors concluded that “New Deal . . . policies did not lift the economy out of the Depression . . . the abandonment of these policies coincided with the strong economic recovery of the 1940s” (emphasis added).

Nevertheless, the New Deal was a political power bonanza for FDR and his fellow Democrats. According to a 1938 Official Report of the U.S. Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures it was routine for the Roosevelt administration to demand that recipients of government make-work jobs, of which there were millions, register and vote as Democrats. As Jim Couch and William Shughart wrote in The Political Economy of the New Deal, “The distribution of the billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to prime the economic pump was guided less by considerations of economic need than by the forces of ordinary politics.” For example, the nation’s number one economic problem was the South, but since the South was solidly Democratic it received relatively little New Deal spending compared to other regions where FDR needed the votes. And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?

Green Socialism - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

And, “The states that gave Franklin Roosevelt larger percentages of the popular vote in 1932 were rewarded with significantly more federal aid than less-supportive constituencies.” What else would anyone expect?"



considering republicans do the same thing.


"
FDR won by a landslide in 32
 

Forum List

Back
Top