"What Would Reagan Do?" (often abbreviated WWRD) is a rhetorical question used chiefly by American conservatives and Republicans as a decision-making shorthand. Modeled on the earlier phrase "What Would Jesus Do?", it asks how former president Ronald Reagan might respond to contemporary political issues. Supporters treat it as a way to recall a set of policy instincts and political rhetoric associated with Reagan rather than a literal historical prediction.

At its core the phrase appeals to a handful of widely recognized principles: skepticism about large government and regulation, emphasis on tax cuts and free-market solutions, a robust national defense, and optimistic, values-oriented political messaging. These ideas are sometimes summarized under the label of Reagan's philosophy or "Reaganism" and serve as the reference point when activists, commentators, and officeholders weigh policy options.

The expression has circulated in print, on merchandise, and online. It has been used by activists, think tanks, political commentators, and voters in the conservative and Republican community. While its exact origins as a catchphrase are diffuse, the formulation became especially visible with the growth of partisan media and social platforms in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, where short slogans function as quick cues for ideological alignment.

Common contexts where WWRD is invoked

  • Fiscal policy — Advocates ask whether Reagan would support tax cuts or spending restraint in debates over budgets and taxation.
  • Regulation and business — The phrase is used to argue for deregulation and market-based solutions to economic problems.
  • Foreign policy and defense — Commentators invoke Reagan's strong anti-communist stance and emphasis on military strength when discussing security and alliances.
  • Political strategy — Campaign advisers sometimes appeal to Reagan's communication style: optimism, clear slogans, and coalition-building.

Invoking Reagan is a form of shorthand that simplifies complex historical circumstances: the United States faced different domestic and international conditions during the 1980s than it does today. Critics argue that "What Would Reagan Do?" can be misleading when it obscures trade-offs, ignores changed contexts, or casts a past leader as a uniformly consistent model whose views can be directly transplanted to modern dilemmas.

Supporters counter that the question is not a claim that Reagan had ready-made answers for every modern problem, but rather a tool to emphasize principles—limited government, individual initiative, and a confident national posture—that shape conservative choices. As a cultural artifact, WWRD illustrates how political movements use memorable figures to anchor identity, policy debates, and strategy.

Whether treated as serious policy guidance or as symbolic shorthand, "What Would Reagan Do?" remains a notable example of how historical personalities are mobilized in contemporary political argument. It functions both as a tribute to a prominent president in the United States and as a contested interpretive lens within American public life.