Worst Presidents?

[homeschoolmom]

I think the War on Poverty was a mess.

[Azriel]

[quote name='Mickey's_Girl' date='Jun 7 2004, 01:41 PM'] This is a really fascinating thread. As I mentioned in an Open Mic post about Reagan, I'm amazed at how public opinion toward him has shifted since his time in office. There were LOTS of people who HATED the man.

I don't mean disagreed with policy. I mean hated, with a visceral dislike. It was like a knee-jerk reaction. I can't tell you how many times the phrase "that ACTOR" was used, always in an incredibly condescending way. As if actors were stupider than anyone else.

Of course there were many, many people who loved him. My parents did. They were HUGE Reaganites. And contrary to what a lot of people seem to think, many people were *helped* by his economic policies. My family was. We went from poverty to middle-class during the Reagan years.

My point is this: even though I've got some issues with Bush, I don't think there's any way we can judge his presidency (for good or ill) at this point. Reagan was a far smoother communicator than W., but people derided his intelligence and his policies AT LEAST as much as they do W. I'm old enough to remember it.

These are troubled times we live in, and we are just too close to it to see how history will judge. We have to do the best we can with what we know.

And by the way: I, too, am less than impressed with LBJ.

MG [/quote]
Yup ... and while I don't hate Regan - my family went from middle class to poverty - so my parents have an intense dislike for the man - though they do not "hate" him. And don't even start on me about how my parents were to blame for our economic status. Trust me on this one, they worked hard. But when the jobs aren't there, they aren't there.

As far as Carter - as a president he wasn't great. But, I truly believe the history will recall him as a remarkable ex-president. He's done so much out of office.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Azriel' date='Jun 7 2004, 02:08 PM'] As far as Carter - as a president he wasn't great.  But, I truly believe the history will recall him as a remarkable ex-president.  He's done so much out of office. [/quote]
Definately Carter has been a better ex-pres than President-- Habitat for Humanity etc. Frankly, I don't think anyone could have done much with the late '70s... what a mess...

[Azriel]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' date='Jun 7 2004, 02:14 PM'] Definately Carter has been a better ex-pres than President-- Habbit for Humanity etc. Frankly, I don't think anyone could have done much with the late '70s... what a mess... [/quote]
Amen. Hard to say that the man was a bad president when he inherited such a mess.

[Mickey's_Girl]

[quote name='Azriel' date='Jun 7 2004, 02:08 PM'] And don't even start on me about how my parents were to blame for our economic status. Trust me on this one, they worked hard. But when the jobs aren't there, they aren't there.

[/quote]
Azriel--

I totally hear you about this. Sometimes people catch the economic wave (late 90s dot-com bubble) and sometimes they don't (also late 90s dot-com bubble!). Just like in the depression--my grandparents' experience had nothing to do with what most people today think about the Depression. They were very poor, of course, but everyone was. According to them (not exact statistics) about 3/4 of the population still had jobs...which is not enough, of course. But they didn't see all the drama (Okies, Dust Bowl, people jumping out of buildings) that gets talked about in history books.

I can see where your folks are coming from.

(Don't they call economics the "dismal science"?)

Hsmom: War on Poverty and Great Society...same type of thing, right? My history is a tad rusty...

MG

[qfnol31]

Woodrow Wilson wins the award for me. Not very many people know much about him (maybe they do, but I didn't). Come to find out, he's the one who's pushed us away from from what the country was founded to be.

I like Bush, he does what he says he will. A little over a year ago, most of the US was for the War in Iraq. It'd be stupid to leave now with an unfinished job still there. That would leave a mess for everyone else to clean up, and won't win us any friends, that's for sure. He got in it with support, now he needs to finish what he started and most people wanted him to start.

[Azriel]

[quote name='Mickey's_Girl' date='Jun 7 2004, 02:18 PM'] Azriel--

I totally hear you about this. Sometimes people catch the economic wave (late 90s dot-com bubble) and sometimes they don't (also late 90s dot-com bubble!). Just like in the depression--my grandparents' experience had nothing to do with what most people today think about the Depression. They were very poor, of course, but everyone was. According to them (not exact statistics) about 3/4 of the population still had jobs...which is not enough, of course. But they didn't see all the drama (Okies, Dust Bowl, people jumping out of buildings) that gets talked about in history books.

I can see where your folks are coming from.

(Don't they call economics the "dismal science"?)

Hsmom: War on Poverty and Great Society...same type of thing, right? My history is a tad rusty...

MG [/quote]
Thanks MG - I'm sure that there are tons of people who benefited during the Regan years, but in and around my world, there were very many who didn't.

Bah. That's why I didn't study economics. Too dismal for me, anyway.

[jasJis]

As StrongBad would say "What the Crapp???"

Reagan was a great President. The Tax Cuts helped the Economy so much that charitable contributions and employment was very high.

It's hard to judge from the bias of History books. I lived through Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush as an adult. My opinions are more based on my personal experiences instead of a larger (and possibly a biased viewpoint). That is one of the benefits of being older.

I voted Carter. Despite the Watergate scandal, Nixon was a foriegn affairs wiz. Reagan changed the way America thought of itself, re-established national pride, caring about others in the Country as a matter of National Integrity in the big scheme of things, whereas Carter and Clinton did it out of guilt and/or embarasment. (I don't think I'm explaining myself well). Bush H was about as memorable as Ford, but had 4 more years to make a difference. He wasn't as politically astute and I think he has less inegrity than his son. Bush H probably would have cut bait and abandonded Iraq and Afganistan by now. (And I think Clinton would have too.)

One thing is, people have gotten much more hysterically critical of Presidents since Nixon. At first, there was respect in disagreement. Now, since Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and now Bush W, people have ratcheted up the rhetoric and hate mongering. I did not like Clinton at all, but Clinton and Bush get attacked more on a personal level and the criticism lacks intellectual honesty in analizing policy failures and mistakes.

[homeschoolmom]

I've told RussianGirl time and again that if it weren't for Reagan and Pope John Paul II, she wouldn't even be in this country. When I was a teenager, if you'd have told me I'd have a Russian living in my house some day, it would have seemed as weird to me as if you'd said I'd have a martian living in my house. It just didn't seem possible. The collapse of the Soviet Union was good for her in that way-- new opportunity.

But for her family, it's been a financial disaster.

Sorry about hijacking the thread.

[Crusader_4]

I have a friend in my class not very rich at all by any means and of Russian Descent he is actually Russian Orthodox. But his admiration of the Pope is amazing his family was involved in Communist Russia and basically Communism wrecked his dads future and career and they moved to Canada to start over and had it not been for JPII and Regan that would of never happened. Now on another note i think the worst was Andrew Jackson he had little respect for Humanity within the nation i.e. Indian Wars as well as other battles and gave the President of the United States far too much excessive executive Power whcih shoudl soley rest upon the legistlative branch as well even some of Jacksons econonmic ideas were not the best all tho some were. But Jacksons foregin policy ostracized Britain (whom America could of soared with had both countries put their differences behind them...this didint happen till Churchill and FDR got together) so i think Jackson was really from a policy wise the worst.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Crusader_4' date='Jun 7 2004, 05:24 PM'] so i think Jackson was really from a policy wise the worst. [/quote]
Yeah... they should've impeached him... wait a minute...

[Oik]

I'm not really sure who to vote for, I didn't really pay attention in HS history and am not up on current policies (outside of moral aspects).

[Aloysius]

BUSH IS AWESOME

if he's elected again and gets to get some more cool stuff done, he should be ranked up with George Washington and Abraham Lincoln

[crusader1234]

Hahahaha, there are other Republicans with similar goals who could do a much better job. I hope you dont consider Iraq cool stuff .

[Ash Wednesday]

Dubya might, and I stress, [b]might[/b] increase in popularity over time, especially depending on what happens this fall, if he stays in the White House. If Iraq is brought under control (the fact that they have government transition underway and a president that the Iraqis and clergy seem to approve of might be of help) if the country heads in a better direction than the past few years, then Bush will be remembered by a lot of people as being the president that the nation rallied behind on 9/11 more than the president that brought us into a bunch of wars. But I think a lot of that depends on what happens this fall.

As for Kerry, he really just doesn't seem to have a backbone as presidential material, so I'm skeptical that his presidency would be any better. He's like Jimmy Carter -- only Carter has moral integrity.

The two-term presidents in particular tend to be viewed in retrospect through rose-colored shades. Clinton, obviously not popular with conservatives and pro-life Catholics, will be viewed in a more forgiving light by the general public over time because he was considered "down-to-earth and likeable" to people, like Reagan -- and was in office during a time of economic prosperity.

All this, IMHO.

I have to laugh at what a smoothie Clinton is -- he's being so [i]nice[/i] about Bush, all things considered. He supposedly said nice things about him in his book being released (of course, he wants to sell the book, doesn't he?) and told fellow Democrats "He's just doing exactly what he said he would do!" If I had a crappy used car to sell, I'd put Bubba up to the job.