Which one of these was the worst president ever?

[Flopper]

What people think of a president during his term in office is not much of a guide as to how history will view his presidency. Truman was very unpopular when he left office. Traditionally when a president leaves office, the new president and family meet with the out going president to discuss the turnover of the residence. According to his biography, Eisenhower refused to meet with Truman because of the hatred the public had for him. Eisenhower on the other hand was one of our most popular presidents. Today both presidents are ranked about equal.

Lincoln was popular when he was elected but his popularity fell through out his presidency. It was many years before historians recognized him as one our greatest presidents.

Just because a president is very unpopular during their life time, is no guide to how history will regard them.

 

[SergeGainsbourg]

What people think of a president during his term in office is not much of a guide as to how history will view his presidency. Truman was very unpopular when he left office. Traditionally when a president leaves office, the new president and family meet with the out going president to discuss the turnover of the residence. According to his biography, Eisenhower refused to meet with Truman because of the hatred the public had for him. Eisenhower on the other hand was one of our most popular presidents. Today both presidents are ranked about equal.

Lincoln was popular when he was elected but his popularity fell through out his presidency. It was many years before historians recognized him as one our greatest presidents.

Just because a president is very unpopular during their life time, is no guide to how history will regard them.

Yes, but just because Lincoln was unpopular doesn't mean he was good.

 

[Shadow]

I went for Obama over Wilson......For the sheer fact that there has never been a president more devisive or polarizing......Not to mention, the man spends like a drunken sailor, with zero accountability or knowledge.

Plus, the man is a consistent embarrassment to this great country......From accusing an innocent white cop, to the beer summit, to returning the bust of Churchill, to dissing the Queen with shoddy gifts, to his disgusting apology tours, to his having William Jethro do his talking for him, to his outright embarrassing schooling and history lesson by Netanyahu, Obama is a fucking yahoo!

I know...I love how he was billed too by the dopey liberal media. That he was going to make the world love us again with his great intellect and charisma.

The idiot is nothing but a self centered boob. Talk about not living up to your inflated (ass kissy) press.

 

[Flopper]

What people think of a president during his term in office is not much of a guide as to how history will view his presidency. Truman was very unpopular when he left office. Traditionally when a president leaves office, the new president and family meet with the out going president to discuss the turnover of the residence. According to his biography, Eisenhower refused to meet with Truman because of the hatred the public had for him. Eisenhower on the other hand was one of our most popular presidents. Today both presidents are ranked about equal.

Lincoln was popular when he was elected but his popularity fell through out his presidency. It was many years before historians recognized him as one our greatest presidents.

Just because a president is very unpopular during their life time, is no guide to how history will regard them.

Yes, but just because Lincoln was unpopular doesn't mean he was good.

Popular or unpopular, it doesn't mean much at all in the grand scheme of things. Who knows. If in 50 years from now, the Bush's decision to invade Iraq is credited with establishing an American influence in middle east that leads to democratic governments and a solution to the Israeli Palestine issue, Bush will be seen in a whole different light. I sort of doubt this, but...

 

[Vast LWC]

Yes. Which one of five, and most have been talking about the best/worst beyond those parameters in terms of recent conservative scholarship against the former leftist monopoly of the media.

Which simply meant that the 5 people presented were the only choices the OP wanted to provide as possibilities for the "Worst President Ever", not that we were referring to modern history. That was not mentioned at all in the OP.

But Lincoln did not expand civil rights. His efforts to hold the Union together and the aftermath of the war merely expanded access to extant civil rights not previously enjoyed by some. He was not a progressive in the modern sense at all. Yes way Obama is a "progressive", whereas Lincoln was not. It's not "a question of more or less". It's "a question of is and isn't". Lincoln was trying to hold the Union together, not collectivize rights at the expense of individual liberties, redistribute property or internationalize our constitutional Republic.

Lincoln didn't just talk the talk about Progressivism, he walked the walk.

The Civil War was the single greatest triumph of federal power over state power in the history of our nation.

I think you would have to be insane not to admit that that is the case. That is part of the definition of "progressivism".

And Lincoln was certainly trying to "collectivize rights at the expense of individual liberties, and redistribute property".

He was giving a segment of the society (slaves) civil rights, at the expense of the "individual liberty" of the slave owners.

There are so many other examples that a debate on this subject is laughable, these are only the two main points on the side of Lincoln being a "progressive".

It may or may not have been his original intention, but that's what he did.

 

[Vast LWC]

Nonsense. Reagan cut taxes, and the economy took off like never before and revenues went through the roof, eventually overtaking growth in spending. Facts. There's no hoping about it. Simple economics. There was never any question that it would work just so. The government was spending too much and taxing too much. Reagan addressed the latter problem and rightly so, and defeated the Soviet Union along the way. You don't grasp the real-world implications of that period in our history at all. Over spending and over spending alone is the problem, not lower tax rates.

I'm giving you gold here. Gold. But I see that I might as well be talking to a fence post, the nuances beyond the black-and-white world in which you live don't sparkle in you mind. They just fade away and leave you clueless. Sad.

I will not say that Reagan was a bad president, I don't think he was.

HOWEVER...

Attributing the economic boom of the 1980's purely to tax breaks alone is idiocy. There were many, many factors that led to that boom, including massive federal spending in the form of defense spending,

Certainly, vastly increased amounts of automation stemming from a technological revolution in the industrial sector was probably the main contributing factor to the rising levels of GDP in that era, which caused the increased tax revenues.

 

[Vast LWC]

Maybe you can list them for me...

Really? Have you never opened a modern American history textbook? Ever?

Hell, OK, let's start a list of accomplishments under FDR, in no particular order:

1. The Hoover Dam.

2. Created the FDIC.

3. Created the SEC.

4. WWII was won. Sure, Truman was president when the war actually ended, it was effectively won by the time FDR died.

And that's just a start of a long, long list. Shall I go on?

Do I really need to?

 

[Truthseeker420]

HNN Poll: 61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst

In an informal survey of 109 professional historians conducted over a three-week period through the History News Network, 98.2 percent assessed the presidency of Mr. Bush to be a failure while 1.8 percent classified it as a success.

History News Network | Because the Past is the Present, and the Future too.

 

[GHook93]

(1) The Mortgage Meltdown: Pushed the Community Reinvestment Act, which was the PRIME cause of the mortgage meltdown.

(2) Student Loan and College Tuition Crisis: He made student loans nondischargable. Therefore, student loans were given away like candy and colleges could (and do) charge whatever they want. Even the shit colleges charge and arm and leg. This is creating a crisis! The largest increase in US college tuition history happened during the 90s and 00! It's becoming insane!

(3) Clinton Opened the Door to China: China was doing well, but wouldn't have gotten to the next level without Slick Willie. He unilaterally dropped all the trade barriers with China, despite their slave wages, currency manipulations, lack of intellectual property protection and their trade barriers against us. Willie even helped them in the WTO! WTF!

(4) Bin Laden: Had him in his sights and did nothing!

(5) Kosovo: The foreign Albanian Muslims were ethnically cleansing Serbians from Kosovo for decades! Finally the Serbians fought back and did it with brutality. However, anyway you look at it the Serbians were the justified in their pursuit of bring Kosovo back to Serbia. He bombed the Serbia. Now we have a hotbed of Islamic Extremist in Kosovo. They are antiwestern and antiAmerican! They are run by a mafioso government! Good job Slick Willie.

(6) Rwanda: A place he should have stepped in and did nothing. Similar to Obama going into the Libya, when he should not have, but doing nothing with the Ivory Coast!

(7) Repealing Glass-Steagall Act with Gramm- Leach-Bliley Act: Willie got rid of this NECESSARY law. It disallowed commercial banks, investment banks and insurance companies from forming together. It correctly saw this as too great a conflict of interest. The repeal of this act was a prime cause of the mortgage meltdown. Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act allowed commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies to consolidate. You have to be a fool not to realize this GLB was a prime cause of the meltdown!

(8) NAFTA: Create an unbalanced free trade bill with a neighboring third world country, what could go wrong. Well we would squander our lucrative trade surplus with that country for a ginormous trade deficit. This treaty (combined with opening the door to China) and decimated our manufacturing base!

(9) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Both created in the 30s, neither had the power to destroy, until Slick Willie gave it to them. Slick Willie gave these quasi-government agencies the ability to create an artificial secondary market for mortgages. Lenders could write horrendous loans and then sell the instantaneously on FM and FM making a killing without an risk!

Slick Willie sucked!

 

[Mr.Nick]

Wilson gave birth to the idea of the nanny state...

FDR was just as bad as any of them, Lincoln was off his meds too.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Obama is just a dumb fool elected because he has darker shade of tan.

Both Bushes just followed the leader...

Clinton is responsible for the financial meltdown..

Reagan was to the only decent president since JFK...

Carter was a lame ass fool

Nixon was a trickery dickery neocon.

LBJ was a fucking racist that designed the pimping of minorities in the "democrat" party.

Kennedy was sane but insane..

 

[Oddball]

Hell, OK, let's start a list of accomplishments under FDR, in no particular order:

1. The Hoover Dam.

Makework project that enabled the creation of the national capitol of vice and conspicuous consumption: Las Vegas.

2. Created the FDIC.

The original bailout bureaucracy, which itself has required bailing out...Big fat hairy deal.

3. Created the SEC.

Oh, that's been one effective agency...Just ask Bernie Madoff, Ken Lay, Ivan Boesky, Neil Bush....

4. WWII was won. Sure, Truman was president when the war actually ended, it was effectively won by the time FDR died.

WWII was won only after FDR goaded and incited the Japanese into attacking.

And that's just a start of a long, long list. Shall I go on?

Do I really need to?

No, I'd be embarrassed enough citing that list of "accomplishments".

 

[Trakar]

My selections Best to worst on poll list

1) Wilson

2) Nixon

3) Carter

4) Obama

5) Bush

That said, there would be a considerable gap between Wilson & Nixon, and between Carter & Obama.

0-100

Wilson 85

Nixon 70

Carter 69

Obama 30

Bush 22

 

[American Cowboy]

Not even close...this MFer Obama has destroyed America as we know it.

 

[Oddball]

Not even close...this MFer Obama has destroyed America as we know it.

He's merely standing on the shoulders of dueling douchebags, Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.

History didn't begin the day you were born, dude.

 

[SergeGainsbourg]

Not even close...this MFer Obama has destroyed America as we know it.

I think you may be getting Obama confused with Bush as the country was heading towards surplus when Bush took over and his combination of tax cuts for the very wealth, pointless wars, asleep at the switch while bankers robbed the place, and medicare give-away to big pharma with drug benefit has turned us into a fiscal disaster house, beating his hero Ronald Reagan (Cheney, "Reagan proved deficits don't matter" when defending their kleptocratic policies). Moreover, the bills keep coming due for criminal level mis-mangement during his rain forcing Obama to just continue cleaning up the mess (like he did by getting Bin Laden and saving the auto industry, etc, etc, etc.).

So what is it that Obama has done that has "destroyed America"?

 

[rightwinger]

What people think of a president during his term in office is not much of a guide as to how history will view his presidency. Truman was very unpopular when he left office. Traditionally when a president leaves office, the new president and family meet with the out going president to discuss the turnover of the residence. According to his biography, Eisenhower refused to meet with Truman because of the hatred the public had for him. Eisenhower on the other hand was one of our most popular presidents. Today both presidents are ranked about equal.

Lincoln was popular when he was elected but his popularity fell through out his presidency. It was many years before historians recognized him as one our greatest presidents.

Just because a president is very unpopular during their life time, is no guide to how history will regard them.

Lincoln was ridiculed and despised through most of his presidency. He was looked at as a buffoon. Grant and Sherman ensured his re-election with victories in late 1864. Much like JFK, he was martyred after his assasination. But he did what it took to preserve the union and abolish slavery

 

[Mr. Shaman]

more threads about personal insults so you can avoid the facts?

.....Especially when that (same) question's been answered....

.....so often.

 

[Steelplate]

My two aren't even on the list....

1. Herbert Hoover- The man ignored all the warning signs that led to the Great Depression. He then mismanaged it when it did hit. Look up "Hoovervilles" on the internet.

2. Ronald Reagan- This one hurts me personally, because I believed in the man. But 30 years of "trickle down Economics have all but destroyed our country by letting Big Business rule the Republic instead of the people. I am not sure this is how he wanted it, but this is the way it happened. Ever since "Reaganomics" have been the norm, our Debt has been ever increasing, businesses keep getting richer and more powerful and our people keep losing in the deal.

Here's the thing... Much like the idea of Communism(everyone working and living for each other), the idea of "Trickle Down" only works in a perfect society with perfect people.

But in real life, People are greedy. In Communism, there will be people within the Government(that runs everything) who want more than their "Fair share" and hoard and do for themselves instead of for the collective.

Similarly, in order for "Trickle Down" to work... Trickling can't be voluntary. There are too many greedy Businessmen who chose to hoard the wealth instead of trickling down. So then the Federal Government keeps trying to get them to "trickle down" by spending money on them... lowering their tax rates, giving them big government contracts, privatizing services... None of it works... for the everyday people... it works for Big business just fine. But it puts our government in huge debt and screws the Middle Class.

Just take a look at how the deficit has exploded under the Reaganomics model. Look at the Deficit level before Reagan and after Reagan.

That is the madness of the "Trickle Down" Model. It is entirely for the benefit of the Conglomerate and has little to do with actual "trickling".

 

[rightwinger]

My two aren't even on the list....

1. Herbert Hoover- The man ignored all the warning signs that led to the Great Depression. He then mismanaged it when it did hit. Look up "Hoovervilles" on the internet.

2. Ronald Reagan- This one hurts me personally, because I believed in the man. But 30 years of "trickle down Economics have all but destroyed our country by letting Big Business rule the Republic instead of the people. I am not sure this is how he wanted it, but this is the way it happened. Ever since "Reaganomics" have been the norm, our Debt has been ever increasing, businesses keep getting richer and more powerful and our people keep losing in the deal.

Here's the thing... Much like the idea of Communism(everyone working and living for each other), the idea of "Trickle Down" only works in a perfect society with perfect people.

But in real life, People are greedy. In Communism, there will be people within the Government(that runs everything) who want more than their "Fair share" and hoard and do for themselves instead of for the collective.

Similarly, in order for "Trickle Down" to work... Trickling can't be voluntary. There are too many greedy Businessmen who chose to hoard the wealth instead of trickling down. So then the Federal Government keeps trying to get them to "trickle down" by spending money on them... lowering their tax rates, giving them big government contracts, privatizing services... None of it works... for the everyday people... it works for Big business just fine. But it puts our government in huge debt and screws the Middle Class.

Just take a look at how the deficit has exploded under the Reaganomics model. Look at the Deficit level before Reagan and after Reagan.

That is the madness of the "Trickle Down" Model. It is entirely for the benefit of the Conglomerate and has little to do with actual "trickling".

I agree with you that Reagans stature as a President will decrease over time as it becomes evident the economic impact of his theories destroyed the US economic and social structure

Reagans greatest accomplishment will be that he destroyed the Middle Class