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.
Just to clarify are you hanging this on Lincoln?
and as a negative
the problem is it didn't go far enough to root out the plantation culture and way of life permanently
And when I speak of Bretton woods during Nixon's presidency, I am speaking of the fact that Nixon is responsible for devising the scheme and selling it to debase the gold standard.
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
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 had the luxury of not needing a party
no one after him really did
makes it easy to throw stones
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
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.
Just to clarify are you hanging this on Lincoln?
and as a negative
the problem is it didn't go far enough to root out the plantation culture and way of life permanently
burning down the south didn't seem to do a lot to fix the culture
the lack of fixing the south is probably on Johnson for shitting up reconstruction
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
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.
Just to clarify are you hanging this on Lincoln?
and as a negative
the problem is it didn't go far enough to root out the plantation culture and way of life permanently
burning down the south didn't seem to do a lot to fix the culture
the lack of fixing the south is probably on Johnson for shitting up reconstruction
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I don't think that Riemann's arguing we should've just burnt down a few more farms and everything would've been fine and dandy. He knows there is more to "rooting out the plantation culture and way of life" than aimless devastation.
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.
Eh, I'm not even really prepared to call that much of a black mark. It just seems the kind of base level of foreign policy-related killing presidents gets up to, at least in the post-WW2 period, and the appending of "drones" to the affair doesn't really change much imo.
And when I speak of Bretton woods during Nixon's presidency, I am speaking of the fact that Nixon is responsible for devising the scheme and selling it to debase the gold standard.
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
Again, you can't bring up Nixon opening China without mentioning that he poisoned that well. And he also brought us things like the Saturday Night Massacre (the dismissal of the DoJ official investigating the Watergate breakin and the Nixon campaign's involvement by Robert Bork (after the AG and Deputy AG resigned in protest.)) Much of the fallout from Watergate is stuff we're still dealing with today, impacting how we deal with the Presidency.
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.
Just to clarify are you hanging this on Lincoln?
and as a negative
the problem is it didn't go far enough to root out the plantation culture and way of life permanently
burning down the south didn't seem to do a lot to fix the culture
the lack of fixing the south is probably on Johnson for shitting up reconstruction
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I don't think that Riemann's arguing we should've just burnt down a few more farms and everything would've been fine and dandy. He knows there is more to "rooting out the plantation culture and way of life" than aimless devastation.
yes it was that the "devastation of the south" didn't go far enough
so sure, not just burning down a few more farms but wreaking more devastation writ large on the south.
the issue with rooting out plantation culture wasn't that the south wasn't destroyed enough
it was the fucking up of reconstruction, it was screwing up the rebuilding that was the failure, not a lack of wrecking shit
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
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.
I think you can be very anti-Lochner court and still be against packing the supreme court.
In my (rather uninformed opinion), the Lochner court is a pretty classic example of judicial activism where the court was using the constitution as a means to invalidate legislature rather than sticking with its job of interpreting the constitution. That's bad but that doesn't mean that the president is entitled to abuse his powers. There was an existing way of dealing with supreme court opposition (slowly appoint new justices) and FDR rightly faced a major revolt in his own party when he tried to circumvent it.
"The only way to get rid of a temptation is to give into it." - Oscar Wilde
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
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.
Greg also lost.
The original Survivor series is actually really kinda fascinating to watch because unlike any later season of any show like it, no one seems to quite know what to do so everyone's kinda winging it.
And in the end, it's the people who formed a party who won. Because political parties are powerful in a democracy. Organisation is inevitable because of that.
And when I speak of Bretton woods during Nixon's presidency, I am speaking of the fact that Nixon is responsible for devising the scheme and selling it to debase the gold standard.
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
Again, you can't bring up Nixon opening China without mentioning that he poisoned that well. And he also brought us things like the Saturday Night Massacre (the dismissal of the DoJ official investigating the Watergate breakin and the Nixon campaign's involvement by Robert Bork (after the AG and Deputy AG resigned in protest.)) Much of the fallout from Watergate is stuff we're still dealing with today, impacting how we deal with the Presidency.
It seems like you bring up unrelated things to the facts I state, and often with pure conjecture.
The only point I'm trying to make about Nixon is that he was a deeply impactful president (which you obviously agree with by your post above), and that alone makes him better than the do nothing's like Harrison, Taylor, Hoover, Harding's. etc. I don't see how the statement that Nixon is in our better third of presidents can be disputed based on his legacy.
And when I speak of Bretton woods during Nixon's presidency, I am speaking of the fact that Nixon is responsible for devising the scheme and selling it to debase the gold standard.
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
Again, you can't bring up Nixon opening China without mentioning that he poisoned that well. And he also brought us things like the Saturday Night Massacre (the dismissal of the DoJ official investigating the Watergate breakin and the Nixon campaign's involvement by Robert Bork (after the AG and Deputy AG resigned in protest.)) Much of the fallout from Watergate is stuff we're still dealing with today, impacting how we deal with the Presidency.
It seems like you bring up unrelated things to the facts I state, and often with pure conjecture.
The only point I'm trying to make about Nixon is that he was a deeply impactful president (which you obviously agree with by your post above), and that alone makes him better than the do nothing's like Harrison, Taylor, Hoover, Harding's. etc. I don't see how the statement that Nixon is in our better third of presidents can be disputed based on his legacy.
His clear, indisputable negatives (extending Vietnam and the Watergate cover-up) are really, really bad, though. And that's before getting into various opinions on Kissinger.
He had a huge impact and is insanely controversial. Top 3rd at this point means #14 or higher, which isn't an insane bar to clear, but it's hard to put him there on a best list for me.
I think he would be an easy Top-10 if we're ranking on impact.
I should know more about American history, but all of the presidents listed all have one fault or another.
I chose T. Roosevelt because he seems to be the model of a future president that I would really want in office. Chasing after big corporate interests, providing government protection the land we all share, bringing peace to the world.
I'm certain that he has more than his fair share of problems — big game hunting, for example — but otherwise he seems like a good, safe option.
And when I speak of Bretton woods during Nixon's presidency, I am speaking of the fact that Nixon is responsible for devising the scheme and selling it to debase the gold standard.
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
Nixon discarded bretton woods because he was facing a currency crisis, and this is after having convinced the major european countries to hold dollars without converting them (note this was pre-Nixon), thus making them de-facto fiat anyway and also coincidentally showing it could work. It was inevitable, not some brilliant masterstroke
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.
I think you can be very anti-Lochner court and still be against packing the supreme court.
In my (rather uninformed opinion), the Lochner court is a pretty classic example of judicial activism where the court was using the constitution as a means to invalidate legislature rather than sticking with its job of interpreting the constitution. That's bad but that doesn't mean that the president is entitled to abuse his powers. There was an existing way of dealing with supreme court opposition (slowly appoint new justices) and FDR rightly faced a major revolt in his own party when he tried to circumvent it.
I was only speaking of appointments. When FDR tried to circumvent the Supreme Court is the jump he shark moment of his presidency for sure, but I'm not a huge fan of the man or his ideology.
His overcoming of disability and his speechifying was amazing/great, though. And his fireside chats warmed my gramps heart I'm sure...
And when I speak of Bretton woods during Nixon's presidency, I am speaking of the fact that Nixon is responsible for devising the scheme and selling it to debase the gold standard.
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
Nixon discarded bretton woods because he was facing a currency crisis, and this is after having convinced the major european countries to hold dollars without converting them (note this was pre-Nixon), thus making them de-facto fiat anyway and also coincidentally showing it could work. It was inevitable, not some brilliant masterstroke
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.
Just to clarify are you hanging this on Lincoln?
and as a negative
the problem is it didn't go far enough to root out the plantation culture and way of life permanently
burning down the south didn't seem to do a lot to fix the culture
the lack of fixing the south is probably on Johnson for shitting up reconstruction
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I don't think that Riemann's arguing we should've just burnt down a few more farms and everything would've been fine and dandy. He knows there is more to "rooting out the plantation culture and way of life" than aimless devastation.
yes it was that the "devastation of the south" didn't go far enough
so sure, not just burning down a few more farms but wreaking more devastation writ large on the south.
the issue with rooting out plantation culture wasn't that the south wasn't destroyed enough
it was the fucking up of reconstruction, it was screwing up the rebuilding that was the failure, not a lack of wrecking shit
The problem was that we left the Southern elites in place, instead of removing them from power. We should have stripped the plantation owners of their lands and redistributed them. We also should have given all members of the Confederate government and all Confederate flag officers the "traitor's reward", especially those, like Lee, who broke their oaths of allegiance as former US Army officers.
I should know more about American history, but all of the presidents listed all have one fault or another.
I chose T. Roosevelt because he seems to be the model of a future president that I would really want in office. Chasing after big corporate interests, providing government protection the land we all share, bringing peace to the world.
I'm certain that he has more than his fair share of problems — big game hunting, for example — but otherwise he seems like a good, safe option.
He was a hardcore imperialist and a strong believer in the idea of combat bringing glory, etc. He had a lot of great domestic policy, but he is not the kind of President that any non-American would want in the office.
I should know more about American history, but all of the presidents listed all have one fault or another.
I chose T. Roosevelt because he seems to be the model of a future president that I would really want in office. Chasing after big corporate interests, providing government protection the land we all share, bringing peace to the world.
I'm certain that he has more than his fair share of problems — big game hunting, for example — but otherwise he seems like a good, safe option.
He was a hardcore imperialist and a strong believer in the idea of combat bringing glory, etc. He had a lot of great domestic policy, but he is not the kind of President that any non-American would want in the office.
I should know more about American history, but all of the presidents listed all have one fault or another.
I chose T. Roosevelt because he seems to be the model of a future president that I would really want in office. Chasing after big corporate interests, providing government protection the land we all share, bringing peace to the world.
I'm certain that he has more than his fair share of problems — big game hunting, for example — but otherwise he seems like a good, safe option.
He was a hardcore imperialist and a strong believer in the idea of combat bringing glory, etc. He had a lot of great domestic policy, but he is not the kind of President that any non-American would want in the office.
I knew I forgot something.
I guess I should've abstained.
Ha, no problem. The internet cult of personality around the guy is something I've always found a bit strange, and I enjoy poking at it every once in a while.
I think Nixon is the perfect example of the fallings the office of the president can have, and Roosevelt and him have more in common than Is evident on a cursory glancing of the men and their legacy psychologically.
Nixon was obsessed with power and once he finally reached the heights of the office, he felt he could do no wrong because he had such a vision!
Roosevelt was obsessed with power, after losing his father at a young age and being robbed of his virility by polio. He had such a vision...
I should know more about American history, but all of the presidents listed all have one fault or another.
I chose T. Roosevelt because he seems to be the model of a future president that I would really want in office. Chasing after big corporate interests, providing government protection the land we all share, bringing peace to the world.
I'm certain that he has more than his fair share of problems — big game hunting, for example — but otherwise he seems like a good, safe option.
He was a hardcore imperialist and a strong believer in the idea of combat bringing glory, etc. He had a lot of great domestic policy, but he is not the kind of President that any non-American would want in the office.
His niece Eleanor converted his imperialist outlook and he was the lesser aristocrat/patriarchal of the Roosevelts.
Like I said, watch the Roosevelts guys! It's on Netflix and it's real good! Let's you see all three(!) of the Roosevelts. Warts and all. It is 6 hours plus, though...
I should know more about American history, but all of the presidents listed all have one fault or another.
I chose T. Roosevelt because he seems to be the model of a future president that I would really want in office. Chasing after big corporate interests, providing government protection the land we all share, bringing peace to the world.
I'm certain that he has more than his fair share of problems — big game hunting, for example — but otherwise he seems like a good, safe option.
He was a hardcore imperialist and a strong believer in the idea of combat bringing glory, etc. He had a lot of great domestic policy, but he is not the kind of President that any non-American would want in the office.
His niece Eleanor converted his imperialist outlook and he was the lesser aristocrat/patriarchal of the Roosevelts.
Like I said, watch the Roosevelts guys! It's on Netflix and it's real good! Let's you see all three(!) of the Roosevelts. Warts and all. It is 6 hours plus, though...
I thought we were only judging their actions in office? :P
I think FDR is overrated as well, but not to the extent you do.
And when I speak of Bretton woods during Nixon's presidency, I am speaking of the fact that Nixon is responsible for devising the scheme and selling it to debase the gold standard.
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
Again, you can't bring up Nixon opening China without mentioning that he poisoned that well. And he also brought us things like the Saturday Night Massacre (the dismissal of the DoJ official investigating the Watergate breakin and the Nixon campaign's involvement by Robert Bork (after the AG and Deputy AG resigned in protest.)) Much of the fallout from Watergate is stuff we're still dealing with today, impacting how we deal with the Presidency.
It seems like you bring up unrelated things to the facts I state, and often with pure conjecture.
The only point I'm trying to make about Nixon is that he was a deeply impactful president (which you obviously agree with by your post above), and that alone makes him better than the do nothing's like Harrison, Taylor, Hoover, Harding's. etc. I don't see how the statement that Nixon is in our better third of presidents can be disputed based on his legacy.
A fertilizer plant explosion is deeply impactful as well, yet I doubt that anyone would consider it good. When someone does horrible things (and did Nixon ever do horrible things), saying "but he made an impact" is not a positive attribute!
I feel like "first generation" presidents get a lot of unverifiable praise, and were essentially all at war all the time which really limited the way publications would have treated them.
I think you have to pick your favorite from like 1776-1900 based on what information we have. Then 1900-2016 as a pick based on actual evidence.
Lincoln and LBJ because they did things before they were politically convenient with regards to civil rights. Essentially dragging the rest of the country into a new era each time, only to be hated for it then eventually credited posthumously.
FDR honorable mention for The New Deal.
Kennedy kind of useless pretty boy. He ushered in the era of voting for a prom king instead of leader. So fuck that guy.
And when I speak of Bretton woods during Nixon's presidency, I am speaking of the fact that Nixon is responsible for devising the scheme and selling it to debase the gold standard.
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
Again, you can't bring up Nixon opening China without mentioning that he poisoned that well. And he also brought us things like the Saturday Night Massacre (the dismissal of the DoJ official investigating the Watergate breakin and the Nixon campaign's involvement by Robert Bork (after the AG and Deputy AG resigned in protest.)) Much of the fallout from Watergate is stuff we're still dealing with today, impacting how we deal with the Presidency.
It seems like you bring up unrelated things to the facts I state, and often with pure conjecture.
The only point I'm trying to make about Nixon is that he was a deeply impactful president (which you obviously agree with by your post above), and that alone makes him better than the do nothing's like Harrison, Taylor, Hoover, Harding's. etc. I don't see how the statement that Nixon is in our better third of presidents can be disputed based on his legacy.
A fertilizer plant explosion is deeply impactful as well, yet I doubt that anyone would consider it good. When someone does horrible things (and did Nixon ever do horrible things), saying "but he made an impact" is not a positive attribute!
Your prose poetic while quaint, is lost on me. Nixon did good and bad things, as all presidents do to differing degrees. Just because you feel
Nixon is the embodiment of evil, doesn't lessen the effect and impact of the things I've stated, and I would say their outcome was good for the
US given our status as a superpower hasn't faltered yet.
The most telling fact of Nixon of all is that he would've beat Goldwater without Watergate. His hubris got the best of him. He was still a better and more qualified president than Ford and I would consider his impeachment a mistake for the republic with perfect hindsight, as I would say most historians would concur.
Nixon was a paranoid megalomaniac who never should have been allowed within 10 miles of the Oval Office. With apologies to Iran, elevating that motherfucker was Ike's worst mistake.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
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.
Just to clarify are you hanging this on Lincoln?
and as a negative
the problem is it didn't go far enough to root out the plantation culture and way of life permanently
burning down the south didn't seem to do a lot to fix the culture
the lack of fixing the south is probably on Johnson for shitting up reconstruction
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I don't think that Riemann's arguing we should've just burnt down a few more farms and everything would've been fine and dandy. He knows there is more to "rooting out the plantation culture and way of life" than aimless devastation.
yes it was that the "devastation of the south" didn't go far enough
so sure, not just burning down a few more farms but wreaking more devastation writ large on the south.
the issue with rooting out plantation culture wasn't that the south wasn't destroyed enough
it was the fucking up of reconstruction, it was screwing up the rebuilding that was the failure, not a lack of wrecking shit
The problem was that we left the Southern elites in place, instead of removing them from power. We should have stripped the plantation owners of their lands and redistributed them. We also should have given all members of the Confederate government and all Confederate flag officers the "traitor's reward", especially those, like Lee, who broke their oaths of allegiance as former US Army officers.
That would have been a great idea if they'd wanted a massive unwinnable decades long guerilla conflict.
What they should have done is offered large economic development and social welfare subsidies tied to desegregation and political equality, and directed towards freed slaves and poor whites, then instituted stiff economic penalties for noncompliance.
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.
uhhh I'm not disputing that
I'm pointing out that when you say "Bretton woods" it doesn't mean the thing that you're saying it means
typical usage would be to refer to the conference, or possibly the resulting system
I'm just saying you should use the right term for the event you're crediting Nixon with
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.
Just to clarify are you hanging this on Lincoln?
and as a negative
the problem is it didn't go far enough to root out the plantation culture and way of life permanently
burning down the south didn't seem to do a lot to fix the culture
the lack of fixing the south is probably on Johnson for shitting up reconstruction
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I don't think that Riemann's arguing we should've just burnt down a few more farms and everything would've been fine and dandy. He knows there is more to "rooting out the plantation culture and way of life" than aimless devastation.
yes it was that the "devastation of the south" didn't go far enough
so sure, not just burning down a few more farms but wreaking more devastation writ large on the south.
the issue with rooting out plantation culture wasn't that the south wasn't destroyed enough
it was the fucking up of reconstruction, it was screwing up the rebuilding that was the failure, not a lack of wrecking shit
The problem was that we left the Southern elites in place, instead of removing them from power. We should have stripped the plantation owners of their lands and redistributed them. We also should have given all members of the Confederate government and all Confederate flag officers the "traitor's reward", especially those, like Lee, who broke their oaths of allegiance as former US Army officers.
That would have been a great idea if they'd wanted a massive unwinnable decades long guerilla conflict.
What they should have done is offered large economic development and social welfare subsidies tied to desegregation and political equality, and directed towards freed slaves and poor whites, then instituted stiff economic penalties for noncompliance.
ADAMS: It doesn't matter. I won't be in the history books anyway, only you. Franklin did this and Franklin did that and Franklin did some other damn thing. Franklin smote the ground and out sprang George Washington, fully grown and on his horse. Franklin then electrified him with his miraculous lightning rod and the three of them - Franklin, Washington, and the horse - conducted the entire revolution by themselves.
Anyway, Lincoln's great. FDR, Washington, and TR are the next three and those are the four great Presidents. Obama fifth.
Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Andrew Jackson (my name is cursed!), Wilson, Harding, and W are the worst in some order.
Grant is the most criminally underrated.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+5
Options
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
Abraham Lincoln
grant put honest effort into unfucking the tire fire that Johnson left him, and if they'd stuck with his plan for reconstruction we'd be in a much better place re: race relations today
it's a little weird to me that he's rated so poorly
grant put honest effort into unfucking the tire fire that Johnson left him, and if they'd stuck with his plan for reconstruction we'd be in a much better place re: race relations today
it's a little weird to me that he's rated so poorly
Lost Cause dominated academic history for like a century and smeared the hell out of him. Got the textbooks to write him as a disaster.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I should know more about American history, but all of the presidents listed all have one fault or another.
I chose T. Roosevelt because he seems to be the model of a future president that I would really want in office. Chasing after big corporate interests, providing government protection the land we all share, bringing peace to the world.
I'm certain that he has more than his fair share of problems — big game hunting, for example — but otherwise he seems like a good, safe option.
I might be wrong here because I don't know exactly how he went about it, but I don't think you can hold big game hunting against Teddy. Although I personally am not a hunter, I don't think sport hunting is a sin, as long as it's responsibly done. That Teddy wanted to protect wild places tells me he was conscientious in his use and enjoyment of wild places and it's animals, even if he did set out to kill them.
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.
uhhh I'm not disputing that
I'm pointing out that when you say "Bretton woods" it doesn't mean the thing that you're saying it means
typical usage would be to refer to the conference, or possibly the resulting system
I'm just saying you should use the right term for the event you're crediting Nixon with
it has his name in it and everything!
Nixon is one of the few through lines you can draw from the original conference to the exit, and anyone who knows anything about history would be able to infer my meaning. Nixon, also, was far from a do nothing Vice President under Ike and again, I recommend reading about his Checkers speech to get an idea about what I mean being his better qualities for the office of president that he brings, and read analysis of why he lost to Kennedy to get an idea of why he was a good president. There's a good chance we would've never gotten into Vietnam if Nixon had won in '60.
Nixon was an egomaniac, which again, I think is kind of par for the course of one seeks the presidency, and he was also a psychopath. He very much only cared about what was best for Dick, but he was also a cagey politician and a much stronger president than his immediate successors.
Posts
and as a negative
the problem is it didn't go far enough to root out the plantation culture and way of life permanently
Nixon opened China (aka the world to free trade) and devised a scheme to have a fiat dollar be the worlds fundamental commodity, while tossing aside the gold standard (a fundamental concept as old as currency practically).
Those are things that will be remembered even if the US doesn't exist anymore.
Washington had the luxury of not needing a party
no one after him really did
makes it easy to throw stones
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
burning down the south didn't seem to do a lot to fix the culture
the lack of fixing the south is probably on Johnson for shitting up reconstruction
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but I don't think that Riemann's arguing we should've just burnt down a few more farms and everything would've been fine and dandy. He knows there is more to "rooting out the plantation culture and way of life" than aimless devastation.
Eh, I'm not even really prepared to call that much of a black mark. It just seems the kind of base level of foreign policy-related killing presidents gets up to, at least in the post-WW2 period, and the appending of "drones" to the affair doesn't really change much imo.
Again, you can't bring up Nixon opening China without mentioning that he poisoned that well. And he also brought us things like the Saturday Night Massacre (the dismissal of the DoJ official investigating the Watergate breakin and the Nixon campaign's involvement by Robert Bork (after the AG and Deputy AG resigned in protest.)) Much of the fallout from Watergate is stuff we're still dealing with today, impacting how we deal with the Presidency.
yes it was that the "devastation of the south" didn't go far enough
so sure, not just burning down a few more farms but wreaking more devastation writ large on the south.
the issue with rooting out plantation culture wasn't that the south wasn't destroyed enough
it was the fucking up of reconstruction, it was screwing up the rebuilding that was the failure, not a lack of wrecking shit
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
I think you can be very anti-Lochner court and still be against packing the supreme court.
In my (rather uninformed opinion), the Lochner court is a pretty classic example of judicial activism where the court was using the constitution as a means to invalidate legislature rather than sticking with its job of interpreting the constitution. That's bad but that doesn't mean that the president is entitled to abuse his powers. There was an existing way of dealing with supreme court opposition (slowly appoint new justices) and FDR rightly faced a major revolt in his own party when he tried to circumvent it.
"We believe in the people and their 'wisdom' as if there was some special secret entrance to knowledge that barred to anyone who had ever learned anything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Greg also lost.
The original Survivor series is actually really kinda fascinating to watch because unlike any later season of any show like it, no one seems to quite know what to do so everyone's kinda winging it.
And in the end, it's the people who formed a party who won. Because political parties are powerful in a democracy. Organisation is inevitable because of that.
It seems like you bring up unrelated things to the facts I state, and often with pure conjecture.
The only point I'm trying to make about Nixon is that he was a deeply impactful president (which you obviously agree with by your post above), and that alone makes him better than the do nothing's like Harrison, Taylor, Hoover, Harding's. etc. I don't see how the statement that Nixon is in our better third of presidents can be disputed based on his legacy.
His clear, indisputable negatives (extending Vietnam and the Watergate cover-up) are really, really bad, though. And that's before getting into various opinions on Kissinger.
He had a huge impact and is insanely controversial. Top 3rd at this point means #14 or higher, which isn't an insane bar to clear, but it's hard to put him there on a best list for me.
I think he would be an easy Top-10 if we're ranking on impact.
I chose T. Roosevelt because he seems to be the model of a future president that I would really want in office. Chasing after big corporate interests, providing government protection the land we all share, bringing peace to the world.
I'm certain that he has more than his fair share of problems — big game hunting, for example — but otherwise he seems like a good, safe option.
Nixon discarded bretton woods because he was facing a currency crisis, and this is after having convinced the major european countries to hold dollars without converting them (note this was pre-Nixon), thus making them de-facto fiat anyway and also coincidentally showing it could work. It was inevitable, not some brilliant masterstroke
I was only speaking of appointments. When FDR tried to circumvent the Supreme Court is the jump he shark moment of his presidency for sure, but I'm not a huge fan of the man or his ideology.
His overcoming of disability and his speechifying was amazing/great, though. And his fireside chats warmed my gramps heart I'm sure...
The facts are the facts.
The problem was that we left the Southern elites in place, instead of removing them from power. We should have stripped the plantation owners of their lands and redistributed them. We also should have given all members of the Confederate government and all Confederate flag officers the "traitor's reward", especially those, like Lee, who broke their oaths of allegiance as former US Army officers.
He also broke the Democrats hold on the NY senate elections by instituting the popular vote for Senate candidates.
He was a hardcore imperialist and a strong believer in the idea of combat bringing glory, etc. He had a lot of great domestic policy, but he is not the kind of President that any non-American would want in the office.
I knew I forgot something.
I guess I should've abstained.
Ha, no problem. The internet cult of personality around the guy is something I've always found a bit strange, and I enjoy poking at it every once in a while.
Nixon was obsessed with power and once he finally reached the heights of the office, he felt he could do no wrong because he had such a vision!
Roosevelt was obsessed with power, after losing his father at a young age and being robbed of his virility by polio. He had such a vision...
His niece Eleanor converted his imperialist outlook and he was the lesser aristocrat/patriarchal of the Roosevelts.
Like I said, watch the Roosevelts guys! It's on Netflix and it's real good! Let's you see all three(!) of the Roosevelts. Warts and all. It is 6 hours plus, though...
I thought we were only judging their actions in office? :P
I think FDR is overrated as well, but not to the extent you do.
A fertilizer plant explosion is deeply impactful as well, yet I doubt that anyone would consider it good. When someone does horrible things (and did Nixon ever do horrible things), saying "but he made an impact" is not a positive attribute!
I think you have to pick your favorite from like 1776-1900 based on what information we have. Then 1900-2016 as a pick based on actual evidence.
Lincoln and LBJ because they did things before they were politically convenient with regards to civil rights. Essentially dragging the rest of the country into a new era each time, only to be hated for it then eventually credited posthumously.
FDR honorable mention for The New Deal.
Kennedy kind of useless pretty boy. He ushered in the era of voting for a prom king instead of leader. So fuck that guy.
Your prose poetic while quaint, is lost on me. Nixon did good and bad things, as all presidents do to differing degrees. Just because you feel
Nixon is the embodiment of evil, doesn't lessen the effect and impact of the things I've stated, and I would say their outcome was good for the
US given our status as a superpower hasn't faltered yet.
The most telling fact of Nixon of all is that he would've beat Goldwater without Watergate. His hubris got the best of him. He was still a better and more qualified president than Ford and I would consider his impeachment a mistake for the republic with perfect hindsight, as I would say most historians would concur.
That would have been a great idea if they'd wanted a massive unwinnable decades long guerilla conflict.
What they should have done is offered large economic development and social welfare subsidies tied to desegregation and political equality, and directed towards freed slaves and poor whites, then instituted stiff economic penalties for noncompliance.
uhhh I'm not disputing that
I'm pointing out that when you say "Bretton woods" it doesn't mean the thing that you're saying it means
typical usage would be to refer to the conference, or possibly the resulting system
I'm just saying you should use the right term for the event you're crediting Nixon with
it has his name in it and everything!
Yeah that happened anyways, the KKK.
Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Andrew Jackson (my name is cursed!), Wilson, Harding, and W are the worst in some order.
Grant is the most criminally underrated.
it's a little weird to me that he's rated so poorly
Lost Cause dominated academic history for like a century and smeared the hell out of him. Got the textbooks to write him as a disaster.
I might be wrong here because I don't know exactly how he went about it, but I don't think you can hold big game hunting against Teddy. Although I personally am not a hunter, I don't think sport hunting is a sin, as long as it's responsibly done. That Teddy wanted to protect wild places tells me he was conscientious in his use and enjoyment of wild places and it's animals, even if he did set out to kill them.
Nixon is one of the few through lines you can draw from the original conference to the exit, and anyone who knows anything about history would be able to infer my meaning. Nixon, also, was far from a do nothing Vice President under Ike and again, I recommend reading about his Checkers speech to get an idea about what I mean being his better qualities for the office of president that he brings, and read analysis of why he lost to Kennedy to get an idea of why he was a good president. There's a good chance we would've never gotten into Vietnam if Nixon had won in '60.
Nixon was an egomaniac, which again, I think is kind of par for the course of one seeks the presidency, and he was also a psychopath. He very much only cared about what was best for Dick, but he was also a cagey politician and a much stronger president than his immediate successors.