Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
For people who rated Obama as #1, what's your reasoning? He's done a lot of good things, but I don't see how anyone could put him in the same league as an FDR or a Lincoln.
It's way too early to objectively tell, but I think it's most likely that history will rate Obama as an above average but unexceptional president.
Obama will probably wind up being in the top 10.
Being the first black President is going to go a long way with historians. Washington's accomplishments while President are not particularly incredible. Yet he was the first and is "the father of the nation." History places a lot of value on the first to do anything.
Plus the inspirational speakers are always highly regarded. People from our parent's generation absolutely adore JFK. His space program (not even completed while he was president) is considered a great accomplishment of his, for example.
History will probably look at it like this:
-Built the modern campaign machine (use of social media and new technologies)
-Took over from a horrible predecessor (like Lincoln, FDR)
-Saved the country from the great recession (TARP, Stimulus)
-Passed greatest expansion of healthcare assistance since FDR (ACA)
-Signed into the law Dodd-Frank and Lily Ledbetter acts
-Allowed LBGTQ people to openly serve in the Military
-Ended the Iraq war (how ISIS is handled/discussed moving forward I have no idea)
-Killed Osama Bin Laden
-Provided amnesty to DREAMers
-Got new START passed
-Worked extensively on nuclear non-proliferation (work that I imagine will continue after he leaves office)
-Made the appointments to the Supreme Court which granted universal Same-Sex marriage, and if we're lucky, overturning of Citizens United.
-Incredible orator, finest in a generation
-Immensely successful at rebuilding the global relationships that were in tatters after Bush.
-Appointed Tom Wheeler as head of FCC, which has provided us safeguards for Net Neutrality.
-Tons of executive orders aiding everything from Education, to Gun Control, to Infrastructure to Civil Rights
-and a bunch of others you can read about here: http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/
His blackest mark is probably the Drone program, which I would argue is no where near Japanese internment, the devastation of the South during the Civil War, Vietnam, or Iran-Contra.
Yeah you don't get credit for pulling us out of a war you intentionally prolonged for your own personal benefit.
I didn't use the getting us out of the war as his selling point, it's just another part of the picture. I also don't see a consensus on the claim being made, but again, it's not beyond Nixon. He most definitely did what was best for Nixon at any given point. He was a terrible man, but a deeply efficient politician.
The big feathers in the cap of Nixon for me, personally, are Bretton Woods (which I don't hear any of you addressing) and opening China.
His socks response is also held as a watershed moment in politicos in America, and that is something he as the architect of.
It's not just "concensus" - we have records of Nixon's sabotage, thanks to Johnson having the US spying on the South Vietnamese government.
And nobody is addressing Bretton Woods because it doesn't even begin to compare to the mound of gooseshit Nixon left us.
Bretton woods may have been the single biggest non-war related international political moment in history.
Yeah you don't get credit for pulling us out of a war you intentionally prolonged for your own personal benefit.
I didn't use the getting us out of the war as his selling point, it's just another part of the picture. I also don't see a consensus on the claim being made, but again, it's not beyond Nixon. He most definitely did what was best for Nixon at any given point. He was a terrible man, but a deeply efficient politician.
The big feathers in the cap of Nixon for me, personally, are Bretton Woods (which I don't hear any of you addressing) and opening China.
His socks response is also held as a watershed moment in politicos in America, and that is something he as the architect of.
Opening China lead to the collapse of the American manufacturing industry and start of the offshoring phenomena.
Washington is probably more famous for what happened before and after his tenure... but managing to bind presidents to two terms without any rule or law is damned impressive.
He managed to be a credible thorn in the side of the reigning superpower.
A shame his warnings against party were not taken to heart as much as his term limits... but I suspect weariness after eight years helped.
Lincoln would be my vote some days too though... or most days, if we consider only achievements in office.
Well, let me clarify, I don't think Nixon was a good
man, but he was a deeply effective politician and a good president for the United States, and one of the most qualified presidents we've ever had. He was just delusional, a drunk and an ego maniac. Good president and did more good than bad and got us out of Vietnam. Definitely a better president than carter or ford.
no this is not something you get to credit to Nixon
Who was president when the US exited Vietnam? I could've changed it to read he was president when we left Vietnam, and I'm not looking to argue his Vietnam policy as its a can of worms as well as out of my depth.
I just have a proper appreciation for the impact of Bretton woods and opening China in the world we live in now.
Well, let me clarify, I don't think Nixon was a good
man, but he was a deeply effective politician and a good president for the United States, and one of the most qualified presidents we've ever had. He was just delusional, a drunk and an ego maniac. Good president and did more good than bad and got us out of Vietnam. Definitely a better president than carter or ford.
no this is not something you get to credit to Nixon
Who was president when the US exited Vietnam? I could've changed it to read he was president when we left Vietnam, and I'm not looking to argue his Vietnam policy as its a can of worms as well as out of my depth.
I just have a proper appreciation for the impact of Bretton woods and opening China in the world we live in now.
It is more accurate to say that Nixon prolonged Vietnam until it was politically convenient for him to get us out.
But it doesn't sound as good to say "he didn't keep us in Vietnam forever".
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
This times a million. Fdr wasn't a good man either, but I'll give you he was a good politician.
Watch Ken Burns' The Roosevelts on Netflix and see where you stand on them after. I like Eleanor more than FDR.
Also yes, I realize Lincoln is the safe boring pick but I don't even care, he's in most people's top 10 lists for a reason.
Yep. I'm on this train as well.
I'm very boring with the top of my list, 1. Lincoln 2. Washington 3. FDR
As for overrated presidents, I think Kennedy is usually pretty overrated. He was good, but I don't know that he was great. Cuban Missile Crisis was obviously a thing, and We choose to go to the moon is still one of my favorite speeches, but he usually gets kicked a bit above his pay grade. Oh also Reagan, Reagan was a bad president at best and he constantly gets shoved into the top 10 which is just absurd.
Like most people my number 1 and 2 is Lincoln and Washington but I don't particularly care enough to quibble over which is #1 and which is #2.
Adams presidency has the black marks of the alien and sedition acts. Both grossly unconstitutional laws. He trusted the members of Washington's cabinet when he should have tossed them all and made a coalition of the two emerging parties.
It did not help that Jefferson was actively working against him behind the scenes.
In spite of all his shortcomings as a politician, Adams stuberness and persuit of peace kept us out of a war at a time that could have fractured the union.
I find the critics of Jeffersons accomplishments amusing. The LA purchase was not luck, he had persued that angle for a while and it paid off. The irony of his presidency is that he, in some ways, in acted Adams policies, especially in keeping and expanding the navy and using them to fight the war of 1812 and the Barbary States.
wut
Jefferson basically shuttered the navy, ceasing production and upkeep of frigates and warships in favor of cheap, small gunboats. It worked out well enough fighting pirates, but came back to bite us in the ass once we actually had to fight Britain again and they were free to blockade and raid our coastline at will.
What a strange question. I'm still not quite capable of wrapping my head around the idea that "owning people" isn't an automatic disqualification. I guess it's different when it's your own country vs. someone else's.
Anyways, I vote Obama for being the better 21st-century president.
For people who rated Obama as #1, what's your reasoning? He's done a lot of good things, but I don't see how anyone could put him in the same league as an FDR or a Lincoln.
It's way too early to objectively tell, but I think it's most likely that history will rate Obama as an above average but unexceptional president.
Who's your favorite?
I don't have a favorite, because it's too hard to compare them, especially when you look at differing historical circumstances.
Like, Washington for instance. As mentioned above, he wasn't really all that great a leader and mostly has a tendency to be ranked highly because he was the first. On the other hand, a lot of the precedents he set have become of great historical importance.
Several on your list owned slaves. Another (Wilson) was too young in 1865 to have been a slave owner but was an unrepentant racist. How do we offset that against their good deeds? Should we even put those as black marks, given that they were products of their time rather than personal character flaws?
Likewise, Jackson's not on your list but he helped turn America into a true democracy, and yet it's an understatement to say he took absolutely reprehensible actions towards Native Americans.
I can put presidents into broad tiers, but who I rank #1 is depending on what mood I am any given day. Gun to my head, the answer is Tippecanoe, because I feel bad for him and he needs this. FDR and Lincoln are interchangeable for second place, though.
Yeah you don't get credit for pulling us out of a war you intentionally prolonged for your own personal benefit.
I didn't use the getting us out of the war as his selling point, it's just another part of the picture. I also don't see a consensus on the claim being made, but again, it's not beyond Nixon. He most definitely did what was best for Nixon at any given point. He was a terrible man, but a deeply efficient politician.
The big feathers in the cap of Nixon for me, personally, are Bretton Woods (which I don't hear any of you addressing) and opening China.
His socks response is also held as a watershed moment in politicos in America, and that is something he as the architect of.
Opening China lead to the collapse of the American manufacturing industry and start of the offshoring phenomena.
Bretton woods and opening China go hand in hand in economic policy. You really have to understand the deft realpolitik that went on to establish a fiat dollar as the worlds reserve currency, while opening the world to international tariff-less trade.
And I didn't realize we were in favor of isolationism and mercantilism around these parts if opening China could be viewed as a bad thing. I'm a big proponent of the tide that raises all boats.
His blackest mark is probably the Drone program, which I would argue is no where near Japanese internment, the devastation of the South during the Civil War, Vietnam, or Iran-Contra.
Yeah you don't get credit for pulling us out of a war you intentionally prolonged for your own personal benefit.
I didn't use the getting us out of the war as his selling point, it's just another part of the picture. I also don't see a consensus on the claim being made, but again, it's not beyond Nixon. He most definitely did what was best for Nixon at any given point. He was a terrible man, but a deeply efficient politician.
The big feathers in the cap of Nixon for me, personally, are Bretton Woods (which I don't hear any of you addressing) and opening China.
His socks response is also held as a watershed moment in politicos in America, and that is something he as the architect of.
Opening China lead to the collapse of the American manufacturing industry and start of the offshoring phenomena.
Bretton woods and opening China go hand in hand in economic policy. You really have to understand the deft realpolitik that went on to establish a fiat dollar as the worlds reserve currency, while opening the world to international tariff-less trade.
And I didn't realize we were in favor of isolationism and mercantilism around these parts if opening China could be viewed as a bad thing. I'm a big proponent of the tide that raises all boats.
There's a reason that "Only Nixon could go to China" was a thing.
Yeah you don't get credit for pulling us out of a war you intentionally prolonged for your own personal benefit.
I didn't use the getting us out of the war as his selling point, it's just another part of the picture. I also don't see a consensus on the claim being made, but again, it's not beyond Nixon. He most definitely did what was best for Nixon at any given point. He was a terrible man, but a deeply efficient politician.
The big feathers in the cap of Nixon for me, personally, are Bretton Woods (which I don't hear any of you addressing) and opening China.
His socks response is also held as a watershed moment in politicos in America, and that is something he as the architect of.
Opening China lead to the collapse of the American manufacturing industry and start of the offshoring phenomena.
Bretton woods and opening China go hand in hand in economic policy. You really have to understand the deft realpolitik that went on to establish a fiat dollar as the worlds reserve currency, while opening the world to international tariff-less trade.
And I didn't realize we were in favor of isolationism and mercantilism around these parts if opening China could be viewed as a bad thing. I'm a big proponent of the tide that raises all boats.
that the rich end up taking most of the water to float their boats even higher is a separate issue, I agree.
I also agree that we have to consider historical context. It may well be that some future generation will decry every name on this list for eating red meat (and, in Teddy's case, killing a hell of a lot of it himself).
Washington is probably more famous for what happened before and after his tenure... but managing to bind presidents to two terms without any rule or law is damned impressive.
He managed to be a credible thorn in the side of the reigning superpower.
A shame his warnings against party were not taken to heart as much as his term limits... but I suspect weariness after eight years helped.
Lincoln would be my vote some days too though... or most days, if we consider only achievements in office.
Political parties are inevitable.
Washington is like Greg from original Survivor.
Greg knew that you could play the game in a self-serving way. You could find like-minded people and say, "hey! Let's organize our votes together to exert our will." But Greg didn't want to play that game. He was above that shit. He wanted to have a freakin' adventure, bond with people, and have a good time.
All the people that came later to talk about Honor in the game and bringing along the most worthy competitors were trash compared to Greg. He recognized the inevitability of the way the game is now played, and instead chose to go down with honor, and a warning of how unsatisfying that game truly is.
If all politicians were a little more like Greg, we'd all be better off.
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
The Lochner Court was a blight upon the country and needed to be reined in.
For people who rated Obama as #1, what's your reasoning? He's done a lot of good things, but I don't see how anyone could put him in the same league as an FDR or a Lincoln.
It's way too early to objectively tell, but I think it's most likely that history will rate Obama as an above average but unexceptional president.
Obama will probably wind up being in the top 10.
Being the first black President is going to go a long way with historians. Washington's accomplishments while President are not particularly incredible. Yet he was the first and is "the father of the nation." History places a lot of value on the first to do anything.
Plus the inspirational speakers are always highly regarded. People from our parent's generation absolutely adore JFK. His space program (not even completed while he was president) is considered a great accomplishment of his, for example.
History will probably look at it like this:
-Built the modern campaign machine (use of social media and new technologies)
-Took over from a horrible predecessor (like Lincoln, FDR)
-Saved the country from the great recession (TARP, Stimulus)
-Passed greatest expansion of healthcare assistance since FDR (ACA)
-Signed into the law Dodd-Frank and Lily Ledbetter acts
-Allowed LBGTQ people to openly serve in the Military
-Ended the Iraq war (how ISIS is handled/discussed moving forward I have no idea)
-Killed Osama Bin Laden
-Provided amnesty to DREAMers
-Got new START passed
-Worked extensively on non-nuclear proliferation (work that I imagine will continue after he leaves office)
-Made the appointments to the Supreme Court which granted universal Same-Sex marriage, and if we're lucky, overturning of Citizens United.
-Incredible orator, finest in a generation -Immensely successful at rebuilding the global relationships that were in tatters after Bush.
-Appointed Tom Wheeler as head of FCC, which has provided us safeguards for Net Neutrality.
-Tons of executive orders aiding everything from Education, to Gun Control, to Infrastructure to Civil Rights
-and a bunch of others you can read about here: http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/
His blackest mark is probably the Drone program, which I would argue is no where near Japanese internment, the devastation of the South during the Civil War, Vietnam, or Iran-Contra.
This accomplishment can't be overstated. Watch programs on the BBC for a while and eventually they wind up talking about the POTUS. It's always shocking to me to hear people from some other country unironically refer to him as "The most important person in the world".
But that's what the U.S. President is.
So we went from a "most important person in the world" who was internationally disliked if not reviled, to one who is universally acclaimed by our allies and neutral countries. Hated by our enemies of course, but we would be concerned if they liked him too much.
Washington is probably more famous for what happened before and after his tenure... but managing to bind presidents to two terms without any rule or law is damned impressive.
He managed to be a credible thorn in the side of the reigning superpower.
A shame his warnings against party were not taken to heart as much as his term limits... but I suspect weariness after eight years helped.
Lincoln would be my vote some days too though... or most days, if we consider only achievements in office.
Political parties are inevitable.
Washington is like Greg from original Survivor.
Greg knew that you could play the game in a self-serving way. You could find like-minded people and say, "hey! Let's organize our votes together to exert our will." But Greg didn't want to play that game. He was above that shit. He wanted to have a freakin' adventure, bond with people, and have a good time.
All the people that came later to talk about Honor in the game and bringing along the most worthy competitors were trash compared to Greg. He recognized the inevitability of the way the game is now played, and instead chose to go down with honor, and a warning of how unsatisfying that game truly is.
If all politicians were a little more like Greg, we'd all be better off.
I'm not voting because I don't know US history prior to WW2 well enough.
But I would praise Obama for being just about maximally effective with the hand he's been given.
There is very little I can hold against him, apart from not seeing the tea party frothing in 2009-2010 and passing more legislation when Congress was Democratic. But even that required wrangling the most conservative senate Democrats which was not always possible. He believed he could have 'for the good of the country' negotiations with them until the government shutdown.
I remain really skeptical about the US reserving the right to kill foreign nationals on foreign soil, without declaration of war or permission of the nation for the action, based on undisclosed evidence that they are terrorists. This applies to, but is not limited to drone strikes. But I'm not sure, with the option already on the table, any US president would not use it. So again, hard to hold it too strongly against him.
But on the plus side the man has achieved a lot. He is the epitome of dignity and decorum even though his opponents have tried to bury him under lies an slander from the moment he became a candidate. He has proven an excellent diplomat on the global stage. He has become more progressive while in office, especially on civil rights. His restraint in the Middle-east is not always easy to watch, but I am generally positive on it. The fact that he has not taken the lead on any new military action in the Middle East, only doing so either in coalition, via UN resolutions or through indirect support, shows a better path, that limits other actors, limits culpability and growing resentment against the US in that region.
His deal with Iran may be a turning point. For all the grave flaws that Iran has, it is still large, well educated, relative stable, and in need of allies where almost all neighbours look at them with hostility. Standing up to the Israeli lobby must not have been easy.
There are very few politicians who can lead for 8 years and not acquire scandals. In the modern age, where there is a 24h TV station devoted to seeing what they can make stick it is almost a miracle.
And he is a great public speaker who restored some of the lost prestige of the office, and never seemed to just rely on that, or sell people on ideas that could never be realised.
I'm not voting because I don't know US history prior to WW2 well enough.
But I would praise Obama for being just about maximally effective with the hand he's been given.
There is very little I can hold against him, apart from not seeing the tea party frothing in 2009-2010 and passing more legislation when Congress was Democratic. But even that required wrangling the most conservative senate Democrats which was not always possible. He believed he could have 'for the good of the country' negotiations with them until the government shutdown.
I remain really skeptical about the US reserving the right to kill foreign nationals on foreign soil, without declaration of war or permission of the nation for the action, based on undisclosed evidence that they are terrorists. This applies to, but is not limited to drone strikes. But I'm not sure, with the option already on the table, any US president would not use it. So again, hard to hold it too strongly against him.
But on the plus side the man has achieved a lot. He is the epitome of dignity and decorum even though his opponents have tried to bury him under lies an slander from the moment he became a candidate. He has proven an excellent diplomat on the global stage. He has become more progressive while in office, especially on civil rights. His restraint in the Middle-east is not always easy to watch, but I am generally positive on it. The fact that he has not taken the lead on any new military action in the Middle East, only doing so either in coalition, via UN resolutions or through indirect support, shows a better path, that limits other actors, limits culpability and growing resentment against the US in that region.
His deal with Iran may be a turning point. For all the grave flaws that Iran has, it is still large, well educated, relative stable, and in need of allies where almost all neighbours look at them with hostility. Standing up to the Israeli lobby must not have been easy.
There are very few politicians who can lead for 8 years and not acquire scandals. In the modern age, where there is a 24h TV station devoted to seeing what they can make stick it is almost a miracle.
And he is a great public speaker who restored some of the lost prestige of the office, and never seemed to just rely on that, or sell people on ideas that could never be realised.
Certainly Obama has done well despite facing an intransigent congress, but history always views our Presidents as much by the times as by their accomplishments. That's why Presidents who merely kept a steady hand on the wheel during periods that history now regards as less interesting and momentous get little credit for that.
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
Keep in mind that the only reason court packing was even a potential option was because the (small-d) democratically elected congress was so overwhelmingly Dem. I can see court packing as being a threat to the balance of power by weakening the judiciary, but it's a totally separate issue from American democracy.
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
Keep in mind that the only reason court packing was even a potential option was because the (small-d) democratically elected congress was so overwhelmingly Dem. I can see court packing as being a threat to the balance of power by weakening the judiciary, but it's a totally separate issue from American democracy.
Also keep in mind that the Supreme Court were being a bunch of complete cunts and basically telling the legislature "Nah, you can't do anything la la la la."
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
Keep in mind that the only reason court packing was even a potential option was because the (small-d) democratically elected congress was so overwhelmingly Dem. I can see court packing as being a threat to the balance of power by weakening the judiciary, but it's a totally separate issue from American democracy.
Also keep in mind that the Supreme Court were being a bunch of complete cunts and basically telling the legislature "Nah, you can't do anything la la la la."
I can easily see how conservatives in the 1930s would find a lot of the New Deal legislation unconstitutional. It certainly doesn't warrant calling them cunts.
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
Keep in mind that the only reason court packing was even a potential option was because the (small-d) democratically elected congress was so overwhelmingly Dem. I can see court packing as being a threat to the balance of power by weakening the judiciary, but it's a totally separate issue from American democracy.
Also keep in mind that the Supreme Court were being a bunch of complete cunts and basically telling the legislature "Nah, you can't do anything la la la la."
I can easily see how conservatives in the 1930s would find a lot of the New Deal legislation unconstitutional. It certainly doesn't warrant calling them cunts.
Only in that it's a misogynistic insult. Again, the Lochner Court was a horrible period for the SCOTUS, where they seemed bound and determined to use the Court to prevent progressive legislation to protect the populace. If this sounds familiar, well - guess which recent Court routinely gets compared to the Lochner Era?
For people who rated Obama as #1, what's your reasoning? He's done a lot of good things, but I don't see how anyone could put him in the same league as an FDR or a Lincoln.
It's way too early to objectively tell, but I think it's most likely that history will rate Obama as an above average but unexceptional president.
Obama will probably wind up being in the top 10.
Being the first black President is going to go a long way with historians. Washington's accomplishments while President are not particularly incredible. Yet he was the first and is "the father of the nation." History places a lot of value on the first to do anything.
Plus the inspirational speakers are always highly regarded. People from our parent's generation absolutely adore JFK. His space program (not even completed while he was president) is considered a great accomplishment of his, for example.
History will probably look at it like this:
-Built the modern campaign machine (use of social media and new technologies)
-Took over from a horrible predecessor (like Lincoln, FDR)
-Saved the country from the great recession (TARP, Stimulus)
-Passed greatest expansion of healthcare assistance since FDR (ACA)
-Signed into the law Dodd-Frank and Lily Ledbetter acts
-Allowed LBGTQ people to openly serve in the Military
-Ended the Iraq war (how ISIS is handled/discussed moving forward I have no idea)
-Killed Osama Bin Laden
-Provided amnesty to DREAMers
-Got new START passed
-Worked extensively on non-nuclear proliferation (work that I imagine will continue after he leaves office)
-Made the appointments to the Supreme Court which granted universal Same-Sex marriage, and if we're lucky, overturning of Citizens United.
-Incredible orator, finest in a generation
-Immensely successful at rebuilding the global relationships that were in tatters after Bush.
-Appointed Tom Wheeler as head of FCC, which has provided us safeguards for Net Neutrality.
-Tons of executive orders aiding everything from Education, to Gun Control, to Infrastructure to Civil Rights
-and a bunch of others you can read about here: http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/
His blackest mark is probably the Drone program, which I would argue is no where near Japanese internment, the devastation of the South during the Civil War, Vietnam, or Iran-Contra.
Some points of disagreement:
1) Modern Campaign Machine - I think that people probably felt the same way after the first TV adverts for candidates. Campaigning has to evolve and keep up with social technologies.
2) Recession - TARP started under George W. Bush and was continued by Obama. Major seeds of the recession were laid prior to Bush, such as major banking laws struck down under Clinton.
3) Dodd-Frank still isn't fully implemented despite being around for 6 years now.
4) Iraq would be over now now matter who was president. It was too unpopular and unsustainable to continue. And he built up Afghanistan.
5) Osama Bin Laden would have been killed no matter who was in office.
6) Trump is an incredible orator.
He's a good president, but I don't think he's going to go down as one of our greatest.
Jefferson cuts to the navy was more about overall annual funds, staff, and new construction. The 6 frigates that were completed/under construction were started and paid under Adams. The Republicans redirected funds into the gunboat fleet.
My point stands though. Jefferson ended up utilizing our naval power in an aggressive way; the admiral sent to lay siege to Tripoli was sanctioned to treat with the Italian states to recruit more ships. They gave us a fleet of dchooners/mortar ships and permission use several ports for the operation.
I don't recall if Jefferson decommissioned any larger vessels, but if he did it consisted of trade ships converted to gun ships that were ultimately not effective against British frigates and Ships of the Line.
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
Keep in mind that the only reason court packing was even a potential option was because the (small-d) democratically elected congress was so overwhelmingly Dem. I can see court packing as being a threat to the balance of power by weakening the judiciary, but it's a totally separate issue from American democracy.
Also keep in mind that the Supreme Court were being a bunch of complete cunts and basically telling the legislature "Nah, you can't do anything la la la la."
Separation of powers is still an important part of american democracy even if you think the other side is a bunch of complete jerks. Imagine if President Trump, riding a wave of popularity that elected a republication dominated congress, had the option of forcibly retiring every justice and appointing new ones. He might have this option had FDR managed to set the precedent in the 30s. *shudders*
Battlenet ID: NullPointer
0
Options
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
Yeah you don't get credit for pulling us out of a war you intentionally prolonged for your own personal benefit.
I didn't use the getting us out of the war as his selling point, it's just another part of the picture. I also don't see a consensus on the claim being made, but again, it's not beyond Nixon. He most definitely did what was best for Nixon at any given point. He was a terrible man, but a deeply efficient politician.
The big feathers in the cap of Nixon for me, personally, are Bretton Woods (which I don't hear any of you addressing) and opening China.
His socks response is also held as a watershed moment in politicos in America, and that is something he as the architect of.
It's not just "concensus" - we have records of Nixon's sabotage, thanks to Johnson having the US spying on the South Vietnamese government.
And nobody is addressing Bretton Woods because it doesn't even begin to compare to the mound of gooseshit Nixon left us.
just as a point of order, Nixon didn't have anything to do with the Bretton Woods Conference
his only involvement was in dismantling the resulting system (in which exchange rates were pegged to gold-backed currencies, with the US dollar as the baseline) ~25 years later
the Bretton woods exit is usually referred to as the Nixon Shock in all the sources I can find
For people who rated Obama as #1, what's your reasoning? He's done a lot of good things, but I don't see how anyone could put him in the same league as an FDR or a Lincoln.
It's way too early to objectively tell, but I think it's most likely that history will rate Obama as an above average but unexceptional president.
Obama will probably wind up being in the top 10.
Being the first black President is going to go a long way with historians. Washington's accomplishments while President are not particularly incredible. Yet he was the first and is "the father of the nation." History places a lot of value on the first to do anything.
Plus the inspirational speakers are always highly regarded. People from our parent's generation absolutely adore JFK. His space program (not even completed while he was president) is considered a great accomplishment of his, for example.
History will probably look at it like this:
-Built the modern campaign machine (use of social media and new technologies)
-Took over from a horrible predecessor (like Lincoln, FDR)
-Saved the country from the great recession (TARP, Stimulus)
-Passed greatest expansion of healthcare assistance since FDR (ACA)
-Signed into the law Dodd-Frank and Lily Ledbetter acts
-Allowed LBGTQ people to openly serve in the Military
-Ended the Iraq war (how ISIS is handled/discussed moving forward I have no idea)
-Killed Osama Bin Laden
-Provided amnesty to DREAMers
-Got new START passed
-Worked extensively on non-nuclear proliferation (work that I imagine will continue after he leaves office)
-Made the appointments to the Supreme Court which granted universal Same-Sex marriage, and if we're lucky, overturning of Citizens United.
-Incredible orator, finest in a generation
-Immensely successful at rebuilding the global relationships that were in tatters after Bush.
-Appointed Tom Wheeler as head of FCC, which has provided us safeguards for Net Neutrality.
-Tons of executive orders aiding everything from Education, to Gun Control, to Infrastructure to Civil Rights
-and a bunch of others you can read about here: http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/
His blackest mark is probably the Drone program, which I would argue is no where near Japanese internment, the devastation of the South during the Civil War, Vietnam, or Iran-Contra.
Some points of disagreement:
1) Modern Campaign Machine - I think that people probably felt the same way after the first TV adverts for candidates. Campaigning has to evolve and keep up with social technologies.
2) Recession - TARP started under George W. Bush and was continued by Obama. Major seeds of the recession were laid prior to Bush, such as major banking laws struck down under Clinton.
3) Dodd-Frank still isn't fully implemented despite being around for 6 years now.
4) Iraq would be over now now matter who was president. It was too unpopular and unsustainable to continue. And he built up Afghanistan.
5) Osama Bin Laden would have been killed no matter who was in office.
6) Trump is an incredible orator.
He's a good president, but I don't think he's going to go down as one of our greatest.
Even if I concede on the other 5 (I don't by the way), number six is just bonkers crazy.
I was going to come here and post that I'd rate Obama as one of the most important presidents in the history of the US, and not only due to his historical race. Roz broke it down much better than I could have. I would easily consider Obama equivalent to FDR in terms of impact both short term, long term, and internationally.
One of the most important points that Roz mentions, and I supremely disagree with your criticism, Heffling, is that Obama really dove into the modern technology full force. You can handwave it away, but hell, even in 2012 the GOP was struggling to keep up with social media to the degree that the Obama campaigns were. I'd even argue that the 2016 GOP still doesn't get it. Aside from Trump and other politicians using Twitter in the worst way possible, everything the GOP does with social media seems like a poor imitation. Even Bernie's campaign wasn't as good at it as Hillary's campaign is, and if I recall she was holding the reins of Obama's old campaign team.
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
Keep in mind that the only reason court packing was even a potential option was because the (small-d) democratically elected congress was so overwhelmingly Dem. I can see court packing as being a threat to the balance of power by weakening the judiciary, but it's a totally separate issue from American democracy.
Also keep in mind that the Supreme Court were being a bunch of complete cunts and basically telling the legislature "Nah, you can't do anything la la la la."
I can easily see how conservatives in the 1930s would find a lot of the New Deal legislation unconstitutional. It certainly doesn't warrant calling them cunts.
Can't beat the father of our country when it comes to presidents. Not many revolutionaries go back to private life after seizing power.
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
Keep in mind that the only reason court packing was even a potential option was because the (small-d) democratically elected congress was so overwhelmingly Dem. I can see court packing as being a threat to the balance of power by weakening the judiciary, but it's a totally separate issue from American democracy.
Also keep in mind that the Supreme Court were being a bunch of complete cunts and basically telling the legislature "Nah, you can't do anything la la la la."
I can easily see how conservatives in the 1930s would find a lot of the New Deal legislation unconstitutional. It certainly doesn't warrant calling them cunts.
Only in that it's a misogynistic insult. Again, the Lochner Court was a horrible period for the SCOTUS, where they seemed bound and determined to use the Court to prevent progressive legislation to protect the populace. If this sounds familiar, well - guess which recent Court routinely gets compared to the Lochner Era?
How you feel about this largely ties with how you feel about The New Deal as a whole...
I would never hold court packing against a President. It's just rote for the job. We also can't fault presidents for being political animals.
For people who rated Obama as #1, what's your reasoning? He's done a lot of good things, but I don't see how anyone could put him in the same league as an FDR or a Lincoln.
It's way too early to objectively tell, but I think it's most likely that history will rate Obama as an above average but unexceptional president.
Obama will probably wind up being in the top 10.
Being the first black President is going to go a long way with historians. Washington's accomplishments while President are not particularly incredible. Yet he was the first and is "the father of the nation." History places a lot of value on the first to do anything.
Plus the inspirational speakers are always highly regarded. People from our parent's generation absolutely adore JFK. His space program (not even completed while he was president) is considered a great accomplishment of his, for example.
History will probably look at it like this:
-Built the modern campaign machine (use of social media and new technologies)
-Took over from a horrible predecessor (like Lincoln, FDR)
-Saved the country from the great recession (TARP, Stimulus)
-Passed greatest expansion of healthcare assistance since FDR (ACA)
-Signed into the law Dodd-Frank and Lily Ledbetter acts
-Allowed LBGTQ people to openly serve in the Military
-Ended the Iraq war (how ISIS is handled/discussed moving forward I have no idea)
-Killed Osama Bin Laden
-Provided amnesty to DREAMers
-Got new START passed
-Worked extensively on non-nuclear proliferation (work that I imagine will continue after he leaves office)
-Made the appointments to the Supreme Court which granted universal Same-Sex marriage, and if we're lucky, overturning of Citizens United.
-Incredible orator, finest in a generation
-Immensely successful at rebuilding the global relationships that were in tatters after Bush.
-Appointed Tom Wheeler as head of FCC, which has provided us safeguards for Net Neutrality.
-Tons of executive orders aiding everything from Education, to Gun Control, to Infrastructure to Civil Rights
-and a bunch of others you can read about here: http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/
His blackest mark is probably the Drone program, which I would argue is no where near Japanese internment, the devastation of the South during the Civil War, Vietnam, or Iran-Contra.
Some points of disagreement:
1) Modern Campaign Machine - I think that people probably felt the same way after the first TV adverts for candidates. Campaigning has to evolve and keep up with social technologies.
2) Recession - TARP started under George W. Bush and was continued by Obama. Major seeds of the recession were laid prior to Bush, such as major banking laws struck down under Clinton.
3) Dodd-Frank still isn't fully implemented despite being around for 6 years now.
4) Iraq would be over now now matter who was president. It was too unpopular and unsustainable to continue. And he built up Afghanistan.
5) Osama Bin Laden would have been killed no matter who was in office.
6) Trump is an incredible orator.
He's a good president, but I don't think he's going to go down as one of our greatest.
5) probably not, no, considering that the Bush administration wasn't even looking for him
6) sure, when using a certain, literal definition of "incredible"
I also think that Obama laying the groundwork and encouraging and coming around to LGBTQ+ rights is not to be understated. For me, that's almost more than enough to cement him in history near the top of the pile, easily top 10, probably even top 5.
Yeah you don't get credit for pulling us out of a war you intentionally prolonged for your own personal benefit.
I didn't use the getting us out of the war as his selling point, it's just another part of the picture. I also don't see a consensus on the claim being made, but again, it's not beyond Nixon. He most definitely did what was best for Nixon at any given point. He was a terrible man, but a deeply efficient politician.
The big feathers in the cap of Nixon for me, personally, are Bretton Woods (which I don't hear any of you addressing) and opening China.
His socks response is also held as a watershed moment in politicos in America, and that is something he as the architect of.
It's not just "concensus" - we have records of Nixon's sabotage, thanks to Johnson having the US spying on the South Vietnamese government.
And nobody is addressing Bretton Woods because it doesn't even begin to compare to the mound of gooseshit Nixon left us.
just as a point of order, Nixon didn't have anything to do with the Bretton Woods Conference
his only involvement was in dismantling the resulting system (in which exchange rates were pegged to gold-backed currencies, with the US dollar as the baseline) ~25 years later
the Bretton woods exit is usually referred to as the Nixon Shock in all the sources I can find
I really don't understand what we're doing when we are disputing things that occurred during a presidency. I really hope his thread doesn't get all Carter/Reagan Hostage release.
But Nixon had a ton to do with Bretton woods. Period. Nixon was a deeply entrenched, if not THE Republican figure from post ww2-watergate.
The fact they call it Nixon Shock should give you an idea of who will be remembered for the incident.
Posts
FDR shouldn't be on this list. He was insanely popular but he tried to circumvent the supreme court by packing it with his appointees and showed no signs that he'd ever stop running for president. It could have been the end of american democracy if his precedent had been followed. However, he's still not in the top 10 worst presidents as those post-civil war ones have got that locked up pretty solid.
Obama will probably wind up being in the top 10.
Being the first black President is going to go a long way with historians. Washington's accomplishments while President are not particularly incredible. Yet he was the first and is "the father of the nation." History places a lot of value on the first to do anything.
Plus the inspirational speakers are always highly regarded. People from our parent's generation absolutely adore JFK. His space program (not even completed while he was president) is considered a great accomplishment of his, for example.
History will probably look at it like this:
-Built the modern campaign machine (use of social media and new technologies)
-Took over from a horrible predecessor (like Lincoln, FDR)
-Saved the country from the great recession (TARP, Stimulus)
-Passed greatest expansion of healthcare assistance since FDR (ACA)
-Signed into the law Dodd-Frank and Lily Ledbetter acts
-Allowed LBGTQ people to openly serve in the Military
-Ended the Iraq war (how ISIS is handled/discussed moving forward I have no idea)
-Killed Osama Bin Laden
-Provided amnesty to DREAMers
-Got new START passed
-Worked extensively on nuclear non-proliferation (work that I imagine will continue after he leaves office)
-Made the appointments to the Supreme Court which granted universal Same-Sex marriage, and if we're lucky, overturning of Citizens United.
-Incredible orator, finest in a generation
-Immensely successful at rebuilding the global relationships that were in tatters after Bush.
-Appointed Tom Wheeler as head of FCC, which has provided us safeguards for Net Neutrality.
-Tons of executive orders aiding everything from Education, to Gun Control, to Infrastructure to Civil Rights
-and a bunch of others you can read about here: http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/
His blackest mark is probably the Drone program, which I would argue is no where near Japanese internment, the devastation of the South during the Civil War, Vietnam, or Iran-Contra.
Bretton woods may have been the single biggest non-war related international political moment in history.
Shitty Tumblr:lighthouse1138.tumblr.com
Opening China lead to the collapse of the American manufacturing industry and start of the offshoring phenomena.
Political parties are inevitable.
Who was president when the US exited Vietnam? I could've changed it to read he was president when we left Vietnam, and I'm not looking to argue his Vietnam policy as its a can of worms as well as out of my depth.
I just have a proper appreciation for the impact of Bretton woods and opening China in the world we live in now.
It is more accurate to say that Nixon prolonged Vietnam until it was politically convenient for him to get us out.
But it doesn't sound as good to say "he didn't keep us in Vietnam forever".
This times a million. Fdr wasn't a good man either, but I'll give you he was a good politician.
Watch Ken Burns' The Roosevelts on Netflix and see where you stand on them after. I like Eleanor more than FDR.
Like most people my number 1 and 2 is Lincoln and Washington but I don't particularly care enough to quibble over which is #1 and which is #2.
wut
Jefferson basically shuttered the navy, ceasing production and upkeep of frigates and warships in favor of cheap, small gunboats. It worked out well enough fighting pirates, but came back to bite us in the ass once we actually had to fight Britain again and they were free to blockade and raid our coastline at will.
As opposed to mercantilism?
Anyways, I vote Obama for being the better 21st-century president.
I support free trade so I'm not sure where you're going with this
I don't have a favorite, because it's too hard to compare them, especially when you look at differing historical circumstances.
Like, Washington for instance. As mentioned above, he wasn't really all that great a leader and mostly has a tendency to be ranked highly because he was the first. On the other hand, a lot of the precedents he set have become of great historical importance.
Several on your list owned slaves. Another (Wilson) was too young in 1865 to have been a slave owner but was an unrepentant racist. How do we offset that against their good deeds? Should we even put those as black marks, given that they were products of their time rather than personal character flaws?
Likewise, Jackson's not on your list but he helped turn America into a true democracy, and yet it's an understatement to say he took absolutely reprehensible actions towards Native Americans.
I can put presidents into broad tiers, but who I rank #1 is depending on what mood I am any given day. Gun to my head, the answer is Tippecanoe, because I feel bad for him and he needs this. FDR and Lincoln are interchangeable for second place, though.
Bretton woods and opening China go hand in hand in economic policy. You really have to understand the deft realpolitik that went on to establish a fiat dollar as the worlds reserve currency, while opening the world to international tariff-less trade.
And I didn't realize we were in favor of isolationism and mercantilism around these parts if opening China could be viewed as a bad thing. I'm a big proponent of the tide that raises all boats.
Just to clarify are you hanging this on Lincoln?
There's a reason that "Only Nixon could go to China" was a thing.
that the rich end up taking most of the water to float their boats even higher is a separate issue, I agree.
I also agree that we have to consider historical context. It may well be that some future generation will decry every name on this list for eating red meat (and, in Teddy's case, killing a hell of a lot of it himself).
Washington is like Greg from original Survivor.
Greg knew that you could play the game in a self-serving way. You could find like-minded people and say, "hey! Let's organize our votes together to exert our will." But Greg didn't want to play that game. He was above that shit. He wanted to have a freakin' adventure, bond with people, and have a good time.
All the people that came later to talk about Honor in the game and bringing along the most worthy competitors were trash compared to Greg. He recognized the inevitability of the way the game is now played, and instead chose to go down with honor, and a warning of how unsatisfying that game truly is.
If all politicians were a little more like Greg, we'd all be better off.
The Lochner Court was a blight upon the country and needed to be reined in.
This accomplishment can't be overstated. Watch programs on the BBC for a while and eventually they wind up talking about the POTUS. It's always shocking to me to hear people from some other country unironically refer to him as "The most important person in the world".
But that's what the U.S. President is.
So we went from a "most important person in the world" who was internationally disliked if not reviled, to one who is universally acclaimed by our allies and neutral countries. Hated by our enemies of course, but we would be concerned if they liked him too much.
That's rather important.
Greg really does have so much to teach us.
But I would praise Obama for being just about maximally effective with the hand he's been given.
There is very little I can hold against him, apart from not seeing the tea party frothing in 2009-2010 and passing more legislation when Congress was Democratic. But even that required wrangling the most conservative senate Democrats which was not always possible. He believed he could have 'for the good of the country' negotiations with them until the government shutdown.
I remain really skeptical about the US reserving the right to kill foreign nationals on foreign soil, without declaration of war or permission of the nation for the action, based on undisclosed evidence that they are terrorists. This applies to, but is not limited to drone strikes. But I'm not sure, with the option already on the table, any US president would not use it. So again, hard to hold it too strongly against him.
But on the plus side the man has achieved a lot. He is the epitome of dignity and decorum even though his opponents have tried to bury him under lies an slander from the moment he became a candidate. He has proven an excellent diplomat on the global stage. He has become more progressive while in office, especially on civil rights. His restraint in the Middle-east is not always easy to watch, but I am generally positive on it. The fact that he has not taken the lead on any new military action in the Middle East, only doing so either in coalition, via UN resolutions or through indirect support, shows a better path, that limits other actors, limits culpability and growing resentment against the US in that region.
His deal with Iran may be a turning point. For all the grave flaws that Iran has, it is still large, well educated, relative stable, and in need of allies where almost all neighbours look at them with hostility. Standing up to the Israeli lobby must not have been easy.
There are very few politicians who can lead for 8 years and not acquire scandals. In the modern age, where there is a 24h TV station devoted to seeing what they can make stick it is almost a miracle.
And he is a great public speaker who restored some of the lost prestige of the office, and never seemed to just rely on that, or sell people on ideas that could never be realised.
Certainly Obama has done well despite facing an intransigent congress, but history always views our Presidents as much by the times as by their accomplishments. That's why Presidents who merely kept a steady hand on the wheel during periods that history now regards as less interesting and momentous get little credit for that.
Keep in mind that the only reason court packing was even a potential option was because the (small-d) democratically elected congress was so overwhelmingly Dem. I can see court packing as being a threat to the balance of power by weakening the judiciary, but it's a totally separate issue from American democracy.
Also keep in mind that the Supreme Court were being a bunch of complete cunts and basically telling the legislature "Nah, you can't do anything la la la la."
I can easily see how conservatives in the 1930s would find a lot of the New Deal legislation unconstitutional. It certainly doesn't warrant calling them cunts.
Only in that it's a misogynistic insult. Again, the Lochner Court was a horrible period for the SCOTUS, where they seemed bound and determined to use the Court to prevent progressive legislation to protect the populace. If this sounds familiar, well - guess which recent Court routinely gets compared to the Lochner Era?
Some points of disagreement:
1) Modern Campaign Machine - I think that people probably felt the same way after the first TV adverts for candidates. Campaigning has to evolve and keep up with social technologies.
2) Recession - TARP started under George W. Bush and was continued by Obama. Major seeds of the recession were laid prior to Bush, such as major banking laws struck down under Clinton.
3) Dodd-Frank still isn't fully implemented despite being around for 6 years now.
4) Iraq would be over now now matter who was president. It was too unpopular and unsustainable to continue. And he built up Afghanistan.
5) Osama Bin Laden would have been killed no matter who was in office.
6) Trump is an incredible orator.
He's a good president, but I don't think he's going to go down as one of our greatest.
My point stands though. Jefferson ended up utilizing our naval power in an aggressive way; the admiral sent to lay siege to Tripoli was sanctioned to treat with the Italian states to recruit more ships. They gave us a fleet of dchooners/mortar ships and permission use several ports for the operation.
I don't recall if Jefferson decommissioned any larger vessels, but if he did it consisted of trade ships converted to gun ships that were ultimately not effective against British frigates and Ships of the Line.
Separation of powers is still an important part of american democracy even if you think the other side is a bunch of complete jerks. Imagine if President Trump, riding a wave of popularity that elected a republication dominated congress, had the option of forcibly retiring every justice and appointing new ones. He might have this option had FDR managed to set the precedent in the 30s. *shudders*
just as a point of order, Nixon didn't have anything to do with the Bretton Woods Conference
his only involvement was in dismantling the resulting system (in which exchange rates were pegged to gold-backed currencies, with the US dollar as the baseline) ~25 years later
the Bretton woods exit is usually referred to as the Nixon Shock in all the sources I can find
Even if I concede on the other 5 (I don't by the way), number six is just bonkers crazy.
I was going to come here and post that I'd rate Obama as one of the most important presidents in the history of the US, and not only due to his historical race. Roz broke it down much better than I could have. I would easily consider Obama equivalent to FDR in terms of impact both short term, long term, and internationally.
One of the most important points that Roz mentions, and I supremely disagree with your criticism, Heffling, is that Obama really dove into the modern technology full force. You can handwave it away, but hell, even in 2012 the GOP was struggling to keep up with social media to the degree that the Obama campaigns were. I'd even argue that the 2016 GOP still doesn't get it. Aside from Trump and other politicians using Twitter in the worst way possible, everything the GOP does with social media seems like a poor imitation. Even Bernie's campaign wasn't as good at it as Hillary's campaign is, and if I recall she was holding the reins of Obama's old campaign team.
How you feel about this largely ties with how you feel about The New Deal as a whole...
I would never hold court packing against a President. It's just rote for the job. We also can't fault presidents for being political animals.
As is his war involvement...
5) probably not, no, considering that the Bush administration wasn't even looking for him
6) sure, when using a certain, literal definition of "incredible"
I really don't understand what we're doing when we are disputing things that occurred during a presidency. I really hope his thread doesn't get all Carter/Reagan Hostage release.
But Nixon had a ton to do with Bretton woods. Period. Nixon was a deeply entrenched, if not THE Republican figure from post ww2-watergate.
The fact they call it Nixon Shock should give you an idea of who will be remembered for the incident.