Who do YOU think were the worst presidents of the US?

[MasterShakezula]

The thread title pretty much sums up the topic right there.

Also, explain why.

I won't contribute, as I haven't become politically knowledgeable yet.  I started this thread because I want to see your views.

[Progmetty]

Why don't you turn that into "Who do YOU think were the worst presidents of the US?" before this gets aggressive for no reason

[MasterShakezula]

Done.  Hopefully, that'll make the atmosphere of this thread less aggressive and such.

[lordxizor]

I can really only speak for the presidents in my lifetime since I don't know enough about the actions of specific bad presidents in the past. I would have to go with either Reagan (budget deficits went way up, deregulation, etc) or Bush Jr (do I really need to say why?). But there are probably several worse presidents throughout history.

[Nick]

Woodrow Wilson and FDR are the first that jump to my mind.

[GuineaPig]

James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Ronald Reagan

[Chino]

Nixon for classifying marijuana as a stage 1 narcotic. I havent smoked in quite a while, but it still irritates me. How could someone that makes that kind of decision be trusted to look after the well being of a country.

[jsem]

Nixon for cutting the world reserve currency's last link to gold, the drug war and wage and price control.'

Also, Woodrow Wilson for being the first neocon.

[kirksnosehair]

Nixon + The Gipper + Dubya =



Honorable mention to George H.W. "Read My Lips" Bush

Are we seeing a pattern here? 


Nixon because he was a criminal and basically a low-life racist antisemitic doosh.

The other three because of what can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

 

[73109]

FDR

Excuse my possible ignorance but isn't he considered one of the greatest presidents of all time?

[Dark Castle]

FDR

Excuse my possible ignorance but isn't he considered one of the greatest presidents of all time?

Sorry couldn't help it.  But yeah, FDR is awesome.

[bosk1]

In college, I would have been all over a topic like this.  Now, I've learned enough to know that it's so complicated that I don't even want to try.    They've mostly all had their issues and problems.  It's just a matter of deciding which problems mean the most and had the biggest impact on the nation.

Nixon + The Gipper + Dubya

...

Honorable mention to George H.W. "Read My Lips" Bush

Are we seeing a pattern here? 


Nixon because he was a criminal and basically a low-life racist antisemitic doosh.

The other three because of what can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Not that you aren't entitled to make your arguments, but that one seems off to me.  If your biggest political issue is the national debt, the praise or blame should not really fall on the executive branch, IMO.  Remember, it's the legislature that is responsible for coming up with the budget and for enacting the legislation that impacts where the spending goes.  Not that the Exec. doesn't have some impact on the budget, but not nearly as big as the Leg. does.

FDR

Excuse my possible ignorance but isn't he considered one of the greatest presidents of all time?

Most popular does not necessarily equate to "greatest."  I dunno.  I wouldn't put him near the bottom, but he did create a lot of problems that most people don't know or don't care to know that he created.  A good many of them were meant to pull the country out of the hole it was in, and some partially succeeded (along with the incredibly good timing, as far as the countries economy is concerned, of WWII).  But they created probably-unforeseen problems.  I'd probably put him somewhere in the middle.

[El Barto]

In college, I would have been all over a topic like this.  Now, I've learned enough to know that it's so complicated that I don't even want to try.    They've mostly all had their issues and problems.  It's just a matter of deciding which problems mean the most and had the biggest impact on the nation.

Pretty much.  I started typing out an explanation earlier for why this was a no-go, but decided that even that was more trouble than it was worth.  Simply put,  you can't compare presidents until they have some history to judge them by, and none of the presidents we're particularly familiar with do.  That's complicated by the fact that they all had their own unique sets of problems exclusive to the era in which they lived.  You all know my position on Dumbass,  but I don't know how you could possibly compare him to, say,  Warren G. Harding.  They're apples and oranges.

[XJDenton]

Andrew Jackson & George W Bush are the only ones that immediately spring to mind.

[kirksnosehair]

In college, I would have been all over a topic like this.  Now, I've learned enough to know that it's so complicated that I don't even want to try.    They've mostly all had their issues and problems.  It's just a matter of deciding which problems mean the most and had the biggest impact on the nation.

Nixon + The Gipper + Dubya

...

Honorable mention to George H.W. "Read My Lips" Bush

Are we seeing a pattern here? 


Nixon because he was a criminal and basically a low-life racist antisemitic doosh.

The other three because of what can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Not that you aren't entitled to make your arguments, but that one seems off to me.  If your biggest political issue is the national debt, the praise or blame should not really fall on the executive branch, IMO.  Remember, it's the legislature that is responsible for coming up with the budget and for enacting the legislation that impacts where the spending goes.  Not that the Exec. doesn't have some impact on the budget, but not nearly as big as the Leg. does.

FDR

Excuse my possible ignorance but isn't he considered one of the greatest presidents of all time?

Most popular does not necessarily equate to "greatest."  I dunno.  I wouldn't put him near the bottom, but he did create a lot of problems that most people don't know or don't care to know that he created.  A good many of them were meant to pull the country out of the hole it was in, and some partially succeeded (along with the incredibly good timing, as far as the countries economy is concerned, of WWII).  But they created probably-unforeseen problems.  I'd probably put him somewhere in the middle.

The debt is just one part of it.  I agree with you on the technicalities of it, the legislature is largely responsible for fiscal policy.  I guess I should amend my statement to say "the other three IN PART because of what can be found [there].

The Gipper - mythologized by conservatives, but it's pretty well known that he had one of the most corrupt administrations in history

H.W. - actually, I kind of liked the guy.  I even voted for him, but only because I thought Dukakis was a moron.

Dubya - Belongs in prison, imho.

[Dr. DTVT]

Harding was corrupt as could be and was in office when Prohibition was announced.

Hoover was inneffective in cleaning up the mess (The Great Depression) from the previous administrations.

Reagan increased the deficit by large portions from which we still haven't recovered from and are being continually crushed by, illegally sold arms (Iran-Contra), essentially started Al-Quada by supplying arms to Bin Laden and Afghanistan, and illegally interfered in the affairs of another country and had ordered its paramilitary to attack soft targets such as farms and civilians.

Bush 1 was set up to fail by enduring Reagan's policies, and while I didn't like Bush 2, its still too early to lay final judgement on him but I don't think he'll be worse than Harding and Reagan in retrospect.

Nixon gets a lot of shit, but he wasn't the unmitigated disaster people like to make him out to be and doesn't get enough credit.

[7StringedBeast]

Chris Ballew
Jason Finn
Dave Dederer

[yorost]

Teddy Roosevelt bothers the bejeebers out of me.   Exceptionally effective as President, but I think he really helped drive the future of US politics in Latin America, which isn't pretty stuff.  It's not fair to judge his Presidency by it, but he was also one of the strong voices for imperialism.  He just seems cocky, too.  If he were President today I think I would be scared for the world.  Doesn't make him worst, but I hate seeing him lined up as one of the best so often.

@0's: FDR is controversial, many think he set the US back decades or more but was loved for it.

Bosk1 said the best answer, avoid the question.  It's easy to find problems with almost any of them, and many of them get crap they don't deserve.  The worst ones might even be the ones nobody mentions, corruption has been rampant in many administrations.  Look at the ineptitude leading up to the Civil War, look at Manifest Destiny and all the expansionist wars we were in, stuff we glorify from hundreds of years ago would be seen as disgusting in today's Presidents.

[kirksnosehair]

and while I didn't like Bush 2, its still too early to lay final judgement on him

He ordered torture in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions and invaded a country on bullshit manufactured "evidence" resulting in the needless slaughter of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, many of whom were women and children.

Too early to lay final judgement on him?

What else do you need to know?

He's a war criminal who belongs in prison.

[MasterShakezula]

kirksnosehair: I see you have a very negative view of Chimpy, one that I do largely share. 

I would like to ask you (or anyone else here) out of curiosity:

In the long run, do you think Bush's presidency will have had as negative an effect on the US as say, the pre-Lincoln presidents' failure to effectively alleviate rampant sectionalism between N and S?

I really dislike Bush, and wouldn't rank him too highly, but I don't know if I'm going to jump to the conclusion that he's at the very bottom of the barrel just a couple years after his leaving office. 

[Ħ]

Harding

[Implode]

Harrison. Man, that guy didn't get anything done.

[Ħ]

[MasterShakezula]

You know, since he essentially did nothing in his month or so of presidency, one could say that he was the best president. 

[William Wallace]

Nixon for cutting the world reserve currency's last link to gold, the drug war and wage and price control.'

Also, Woodrow Wilson for being the first neocon.

Yeah. Every president they teach you to adore deserves a spot on this list.

[MasterShakezula]

Nixon for cutting the world reserve currency's last link to gold, the drug war and wage and price control.'

Also, Woodrow Wilson for being the first neocon.

Yeah. Every president they teach you to adore deserves a spot on this list.

Would that even include Washington, Jefferson, and Madison?  I can't imagine any of those 3 being considered our worst presidents. 

[Ħ]

Trinity of best presidents = Lincoln, Jackson, and Polk

[Omega]

Trinity of best presidents = Lincoln, Jackson, and Polk

Hmm...Polk & Jackson?

You mean the guy who basically ignited the streak of illegal US imperialist land-grabs with the biggest illegal imperialist land-grab?
Or "His Majesty" Jackson, who *relocated* countless of Native Americans wherever he decided they wouldn't be an "annoyance"? Gee, at least he eliminated the national debt during his reig - i mean presidency.
                   *in other words: 

As you can see, I'd disagree...

[Ħ]

Without Polk, I don't know if we'd be a coast-to-coast nation.

As for Jackson, while he might have been morally wrong in some of his views and actions, that has nothing to do with how great of a president he was. (same for Polk)

Usually the best presidents are terrible people.  Nothing wrong with that.  We don't evaluate presidents based on how much we like their moral values.

[Omega]

Without Polk, I don't know if we'd be a coast-to-coast nation.

As for Jackson, while he might have been morally wrong in some of his views and actions, that has nothing to do with how great of a president he was. (same for Polk)

Usually the best presidents are terrible people.  Nothing wrong with that.  We don't evaluate presidents based on how much we like their moral values.

Unfortunately, you are right; we do not evaluate a president's performance upon the morality of his actions while in power - we decide whether they did a good job or not depending if our wallets have gotten thicker and our backyards larger...

[bosk1]

Omega, if you have something constructive to add to the discussion, do so.  But you are just baiting now, so knock it off.

[Omega]

Omega, if you have something constructive to add to the discussion, do so.  But you are just baiting now, so knock it off.

Not sure if serious... 

I was agreeing with him. I was not baiting him.

[yorost]

Without Polk, I don't know if we'd be a coast-to-coast nation.

That doesn't make him a good President.  He was an effective President, but that can be trouble.  Manifest Destiny in hindsight can be considered pretty despicable.  It wasn't open land, we were opening many wars and taking what we wanted.

[GuineaPig]

I don't think it makes sense to judge past presidents on today's moral values.  Otherwise, Washington, Jefferson, and all the other Presidents who owned other human beings would rank at the bottom.

[Ħ]

I don't think it makes sense to judge past presidents on today's moral values.  Otherwise, Washington, Jefferson, and all the other Presidents who owned other human beings would rank at the bottom.

Yeah exactly.

The fairest way to determine a president's greatness is to measure overall change.  Delta, basically.  Where were we before compared to where we are now?  The hows and whys and collateral details don't really matter.