Curmudgeonly & Skeptical

The explanation is simple:

In 1942 the media wanted America to win the war.

In 2004 the media wanted America to lose the war.

In 1942 the media loved America.

In 2004 the media hated America.

The election of 1944 was pretty much a bust for the GOP, because FDR was a wartime President and was doing a good job of leading the nation to a sure, albeit, slow victory. What could they say, anyway? "We'll do a better job?" As many small negatives as there were, we were starting to really turn the tide. Beside, on the opposition side back then just didn't have the same lack of moral fiber they do now.

Had the Republicans been of the same mindset as the Dim-O-cRats of 2004, we might've heard:

Roosevelt said that he hated war and would not send any more of "our boys" to die in a European war! FDR lied... people died!

The Japanese didn't want war! We provoked them! We embargoed their oil and other raw materials! What were they supposed to do!

(out of the other side of their mouth) How did we miss Pearl Harbor?

Over a hundred-thousand US soldiers, sailors and airmen were lost in the foolhardy defense of the indefensible Phillipines. US strategy in this regard had been known to be a joke for years but was still the policy under FDR.

Faulty intelligence lead to a near slaughter of Marines on Betio in the Tarawa Atoll.

The Italian campaign was a quagmire, eating up men and material nneded for the second front and the Pacific.

How the planning for D-Day missed the defenses at Omaha Beach.

Market Garden was a terrible waste of resources when US armored forces, Patton leading, were standing on the cusp of the great - possibly war-winning - breakthrough in France.

Why did the Germans have rockets and jets and the US had none or inferior models?

Based on the tapestry of history, FDR's war was successful and brilliant. Throughout the way, though, one could take a snapshot and come to a different conclusion.

Except back then, derision was met with, "Hey Mac! Dontcha know there's a war on?"