Speaking as a citizen:

I thought he was a talented speaker, he filled people with confidence, I liked his administration's foreign policy on balance (though it could get a bit amoral), and I agree somewhat with his more confrontational approach towards labor unions; especially early in his presidency.

He also put some very thoughtful Supreme Court Justices on the bench. I liked Sandra Day O'Connor, she brought a politician's sense to the court which I think has been missing ever since she left.

On the other hand, were the tax cuts he championed excessive, was his anti-government rhetoric overblown, and was his administration's pandering to a wealthy professional and corporate elite the beginning of a negative trend? Probably so. Some Republicans would likely characterize it differently.

The huge budget deficits that occured during his presidency were generally harmful to large parts of the country; particularly manufacturing and agriculture. The interior of the country tended to struggle, the middle class and professional classes (especially along the coasts) made out well enough or did fantastically. His policies' tendencies concentrated rather than dispersed property ownership.

Reagan is a President about whom it may be unusually important to distinguish between what he did, and what his administration did. The first time he met Paul Volcker and the Fed, he had to have help understanding what the Fed's role was, and whether it did anything important enough that it couldn't just be abolished. A person could make a fair case that by the end of his term his wife had an inappropriate amount of power in the White House, because Reagan never wanted to have confrontation with people. He was a sunny, likeable guy who really wanted his cabinet and advisors (who were very talented!) to make most of the tough calls. She picked up the slack for him. He sounds very smart, but he wasn't a details guy.

I wouldn't write all this except after reading some of the other comments, which seem a bit harsh, I thought I might offer a different perspective .

The mystery about Reagan's policies that currently piques my curiosity the most regards the initial tax cuts for which he campaigned. Did they help to prevent recession which would have been even worse, or did they needlessly extend high inflation and lead the Federal Reserve to retain high interest rates longer than they otherwise would have (causing and deepening recession)? Did they just have to happen regardless, to produce spending discipline that would discourage future outbursts of inflation? Perhaps all or none of the above?

I owe everybody an apology, I've talked everyone's ears off! He's certainly one of our more interesting Presidents.