Don't tell me to "go read up" on things when you're so clearly not well-read by any stretch of the imagination. Just as an example, FDR and Teddy were distant cousins, not uncle/nephew.
FDR enacted the New Deal in order to get us out of the greatest economic crisis in this country's history. According to Bernie's own party, our economy is great right now. Unemployment is low, the markets are soaring (with a slight hiccup from Brexit that will undoubtedly be corrected via central bank assistance), and everyone has healthcare. So what exactly is Bernie putting forth these policies as a response to? Additionally, FDR's greatest lasting achievement, Social Security, is more or less a ponzi scheme that is in dire shape. Go read the most recent report from the SSA if you don't believe me.
Teddy, for my admittedly small amount of pocket change, is the best US president since Lincoln. He was able to effectively blend what we would now call competing ideologies - his Square Deal was undoubtedly what would now be considered liberal, while his views on immigration were what would now be considered conservative ("We must Americanize in every way, in speech, in political ideas and principles, and in their way of looking at relations between church and state"). This is what I want in a president - someone who can look at issues independent of his/her beliefs on other issues and decide what is the best course of action on that particular issue. Unfortunately, neither party this go-around has put forth a candidate who comes close to matching that description.
Finally - and this is the point I really want to get across - the reason you're apparently catching a lot of "heat" is because you seem to have taken up what has unforrunately become the standard mode of political discourse (on both sides of the aisle) in the US: you don't seem to even attempt to understand the actual reasoning behind many of the positions you argue against, instead preferring to assume that they arise from selfishness, hatred, or some other negative emotion. For example, gay marriage supporters (I am included in this group) often portray those opposed to gay marriage as holding this position due to bigotry or some sort of disapproval. While there are undoubtedly people who do oppose gay marriage for those reasons, the actual reason many oppose gay marriage is because they believe marriage to be a religious, rather than governmental, institution and therefore the government should have no right to define a religious institution. This obviously happens on both sides of our political spectrum - it's no different than the scores of conservatives dismissing all Bernie Sanders, large welfare-state supporters as only supporting such ideals because they're lazy and don't want to work for their money rather than their genuine beliefs that these ideals are legitimately the best way help the truly unfortunate among our society and strengthen our overall economy. This is simply a dishonest way of looking at your opposition.
