Name the best US presidents, and the most over rated...

[CharlesTheHammer]

Best: Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Washington, Reagan(even though I was taught to hate him in the 80's)


Most over rated: John F Kennedy, Woodrow Wilson, Lyndon Johnson, Clinton

 

[Mehm]

Best: Carter, Eisenhower, Lincoln, Washington (not sure if pre-abolition presidents can really make it in this category ), FDR, Teddy

Over Rated: Agreed that Wilson is on this list, his EXTREME racism is often overlooked. Reagan.

Not that anyone is saying these ones are good but, if they are, they are over rated. Jackson, Taft, JFK

 

[Escher's Waterfall]

Mehm - It seems that Washington was far from being pro-slavery, but he didn't want to risk it becoming a disruptive issue in the new US.

 

[Ravr]

Best: Carter

The Most over rated: , Reagan

 

[Pegasus]

Overrated - Jackson

...Seriously, while influential in a positive way during the Revolutionary years, his genocide in later years is appalling, as is the fact that he is still generally respected (and even is on the most popular denomination of money).

 

[beamers]

The best: For sake of humankind and civilisation, I hope that we haven't met him/her yet.

 

[Max Power]

Best: Carter

lol

I can always trust this forum for a good chuckle.

 

[Ravr]

lol

I can always trust this forum for a good chuckle.

Ya what a terrible president! I mean all he did was work tirelessly for human rights and give huge aids to less fortunate countries8)

 

[Tomer]

What is the criteria for this? Are we basing it off of economical standing, humans rights, or just off their charm and wit?

Overrated: Carter and Regan - Both nitwits. Reagan, specifically, with his racist drug laws back in the 80's.

Best: As someone else said, I hope there is still someone else out there...

-If were speaking squarely on the fact of a thriving economy and lack of a terrorist threat, then could anyone argue the Bill Clinton era was one of the greatest of our time?

 

[Jamshyd]

I wish people would write WHY they picked the ones they picked so that we non-Americans may learn something.

 

[Kenickie]

yes, is it best in terms of domestic policy? foreign? some combination of both? the president that most fit in with the posters ideals?

best: jefferson, i think the most american of our presidents, even more so than washington, he bought Louisiana (and the other parts of the Purchase) in 1803, that land sale amounts to 23% of the entire country.

Jefferson achieved distinction as, among other things, a horticulturist, political leader, architect, archaeologist, paleontologist, musician, inventor, and founder of the University of Virginia. When President John F. Kennedy welcomed 49 Nobel Prize winners to the White House in 1962 he said, "I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent and of human knowledge that has ever been gathered together at the White House – with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."

erm, Abraham Lincoln? the president who only served 4 years, but they happened to be the hardest and worst and most defining four years in our country's history?! sure, he did things we look down upon (suspending Habeas corpus for one) but he also held this place together. his presidency is the most pivotal, in our history, no doubt.

I also kind of like Andrew Jackson. yes, yes, slavery, yes yes Indians...

Jackson's equal political policy became known as Jacksonian Democracy, subsequent to ending what he termed a "monopoly" of government. During the Jacksonian era, the electorate expanded to include all white male adult citizens, rather than only land owners in that group.
In contrast to the Jeffersonian era, Jacksonian democracy promoted the strength of the presidency and executive branch at the expense of Congress, while also seeking to broaden the public's participation in government. They demanded elected (not appointed) judges and rewrote many state constitutions to reflect the new values. In national terms the Jacksonians favored geographical expansion, justifying it in terms of Manifest Destiny.

i dig that.

he also was a vocal opponent of the electoral college, something we still are dealing with today, 150 plus years later. there is a new book on him i see in the library all the time...er..American Lion! I keep meaning to check it out but I always get distracted by something. Maybe this time I'll get it.

worst?

Nixon, no doubt. followed closely by Johnson. and then John Tyler because that guy was an assjerk.

overrated?

any of the ones i had to learn about and forgot and missed their questions on the APUSH exam.

 

[CharlesTheHammer]

Clinton is best? Carter too? Wow.......!

What is the criteria for this? Are we basing it off of economical standing, humans rights, or just off their charm and wit?

Overrated: Carter and Regan - Both nitwits. Reagan, specifically, with his racist drug laws back in the 80's.

Best: As someone else said, I hope there is still someone else out there...

-If were speaking squarely on the fact of a thriving economy and lack of a terrorist threat, then could anyone argue the Bill Clinton era was one of the greatest of our time?

Yes Jamshyd, I can give you some criteria for one president who SHOULDNT be on the list of great presidents, CLINTON!

Tomer, are you serious? Clinton protected us from terrorists? I guess you could say that if your definition of protecting us from terrorists is to do almost nothing while we are repeatedly attacked by terrorists! See: The first WTC attack, The USS Cole, US embassies is several foreign countries, etc. Clinton had like 7 or 8 different opportunities to KILL Osama Bin Laden during the 90's, and he prevented the military and CIA from pulling the trigger every time!
Had he allowed them to do their jobs, or paid more attention to al-Qaida, we couldve prevented 9-11!

Also, it was Reagan's economic policies and the computer industries who created the economy and the jobs in the 90's, and it wouldve happened even if friggin Scooby-Doo was president anyway!

Also, Clinton, and the DEM controlled congress were responsible for NAFTA, which sent millions of US jobs to Mexico, and then there was Clinton's trade deal with China(our enemies) which sent millions of US jobs to China! I mean, Clinton deserves more credit for China's current booming economic situation than ANYONE in China or anywhere else! So they are militarily stronger now than ever before because of it! That is fucking terrible for the rest of the world!

Also, Clinton and the DEM controlled congress CREATED and gladly, knowingly imposed the 'Don't ask, Don't tell' policy for gays in the military! Then , he had the audacity to try and blame it all on the military years later, even though it was HIS fault, and the military were following HIS orders by law! Of course the progressive US media let him get away with that lie as well!! In fact, the media repeatedly tried to blame the military for Clinton's actions for years, as have almost the entire progressive left in America! Thats the old "Dont ever hold the Dems accountable" trick!

Also, he sat back and did nothing while AQ Khan was selling nuclear weapons materials and machines to rogue countries all over the world! We didnt stop that shit til when Bush was in office.

Also, Clinton had a BIG hand in creating the current bad economic situation in America by getting banks and mortgage companies to lend money for houses to terribly risky customers. He wanted lower income people to own homes, which is noble, but those people couldnt afford the homes they bought, plus the way he had them set it up, with no document loans, allowed anyone to buy a home, even if they didnt have the money to pay for it! There were supposedly lots of cons in prison who bought homes! Then he had Fannie and Freddie buy out lots of those bad loans, and when all those loans failed, the Taxpayers of the US were stuck with them! This caused the current recession!

I could go on and on, but the fact is, Clinton took office during a time of unprecedented peace in the world, thanks to Reagan for defeating the Soviet Union economically, and so Clinton inherited the good times! All he had to do was sit back and let the people around him in the other government agencies do their jobs(like the CIA wishing killing Bin Laden), and things would have been great! But he still screwed shit up!

As far as Carter is concerned, the guy had a good heart I guess, but he was incompetent as a leader, and he helped cause the Iran hostage situation by empowering and kissing up to the Shah, who was hated by the folks of Iran for oppressing them, so they overthrew the government, and demanded that the Shah be returned, but Carter refused, so they took hostages!

 

[Kenickie]

As far as Carter is concerned, the guy had a good heart I guess, but he was incompetent as a leader, and he helped cause the Iran hostage situation by empowering and kissing up to the Shah, who was hated by the folks of Iran for oppressing them, so they overthrew the government, and demanded that the Shah be returned, but Carter refused, so they took hostages!

sorry, but this is NOT how this happened.

 

[Bardeaux]

Tomer, are you serious? Clinton protected us from terrorists? I guess you could say that if your definition of protecting us from terrorists is to do almost nothing while we are repeatedly attacked by terrorists! See: The first WTC attack, The USS Cole, US embassies is several foreign countries, etc. Clinton had like 7 or 8 different opportunities to KILL Osama Bin Laden during the 90's, and he prevented the military and CIA from pulling the trigger every time!
Had he allowed them to do their jobs, or paid more attention to al-Qaida, we couldve prevented 9-11!

This isnt true at all.

After the 93 WTC bombing Clinton ordered the FBI and his national security council to hunt down and charge those responsible, which they did. All of those who were directly involved were captured and convicted. He brought up the idea of anti-terrorism legislation in his 1995 state of the union speech, increased counter-terrorism funds to both the FBI and the CIA, and set up the Bin Laden unit in 96 which was entirely devoted to capturing Bin Laden.

After the Embassy bombings in Africa, Clinton ordered cruise missle strikes on one of Bin Laden's camps but failed to kill him. He met with the Pakistani prime minister several times in order to get permission to train soldiers to hunt Bin Laden, but the plan went out the window when the prime minister was exiled.

In 99 Clinton declared the Taliban a state sponder of terrorism, ordered the CIA to come up with another plan to kill or capture Bin Laden and to investigate potential attacks from Al Qaeda.

In 2000 Clinton's counter-terrorism security group drafted the Strategy for Eliminating the Threat from the Jihadist Networks of al Qida which pretty much outlined the threat of Al Qaeda and global terrorism and was forwarded to incoming president Bush.

Bush then demoted Richard Clarke and let the report gather dust until 9/11.

Other than that, I guess Clinton didnt do much.

 

[cj]

^^
I like Clinton but he really fucked up he did have the chance to kill Bin Laden the problem was that a certain United Arab Emerites prince was visiting bin laded. The Administration was about to complete a lucrative arms deal to sell fighter planes and were afraid the dudes father who was prime minister would cancel the deal. Thus the strike was called off by the white house. I saw this on the National Geographic Channel I will try and find a sorce on the internet. I cant find a sorce so take it with a grain of salt but it was on a national geographic channel program not to long ago they described us as having a delta force team with eyes on the target.

 

[Tomer]

CharlestheHammer:
Regardless of how you try and rationalize why Clinton's era was 'peaceful' and thriving economically, the bottom line is, it happened during his reign, his terms. You seem to correlate his success due to Reagan.

Osama Bin Laden: I think this whole pointing the finger at which administration fucked up is becoming a really tired act. Correct me if I'm wrong, hadn't Bin Laden been around since the 70's? He obviously wasn't as menacing, yet, but his storm slowly began to take form as the decades went on. So, for you to try and finger point on the Clinton administration is off base. As another poster pointed out, it wasn't as if Clinton was sitting and twiddling his thumbs. He was trying to be proactive about terrorism, as ANY president is when they are in office. National security and the Economy are always 1) and 2) on a President's agenda.

Mortgage and Economic Fallout:
Again, this is another point people try and attempt to make against Clinton. Yes, he wanted low income families to have the ability to have their own homes. But, this has ALWAYS been the "American Dream." Eventually it had to come to a crashing halt. America has always overindulged, sought out things they can not afford, bigger homes, bigger cars, bigger tvs, etc, etc. Blaming the economic fallout on one administration is in extremely poor taste given the fact that this type of mentality has always been ingrained in the fabric of America.

Don't get me wrong, every President has had their faults, and I am not blind to Clinton's, either. With that being said, I stick to what I said earlier. If we are judging the best president based on a thriving economy, national security, US being viewed as the gold standard, etc, etc, then, Clinton's reign was the most successful. If you want to take a look at how we have done since then, just look at how the rest of the world views us. Do you ever remember a time the US was viewed so lowly by other nations and people? It sure seems the US has some catching up to do if it ever wants to restore some credibility with other nations.

 

[CharlesTheHammer]

CharlestheHammer:
Regardless of how you try and rationalize why Clinton's era was 'peaceful' and thriving economically, the bottom line is, it happened during his reign, his terms. You seem to correlate his success due to Reagan.

Osama Bin Laden: I think this whole pointing the finger at which administration fucked up is becoming a really tired act. Correct me if I'm wrong, hadn't Bin Laden been around since the 70's? He obviously wasn't as menacing, yet, but his storm slowly began to take form as the decades went on. So, for you to try and finger point on the Clinton administration is off base. As another poster pointed out, it wasn't as if Clinton was sitting and twiddling his thumbs. He was trying to be proactive about terrorism, as ANY president is when they are in office. National security and the Economy are always 1) and 2) on a President's agenda.

Mortgage and Economic Fallout:
Again, this is another point people try and attempt to make against Clinton. Yes, he wanted low income families to have the ability to have their own homes. But, this has ALWAYS been the "American Dream." Eventually it had to come to a crashing halt. America has always overindulged, sought out things they can not afford, bigger homes, bigger cars, bigger tvs, etc, etc. Blaming the economic fallout on one administration is in extremely poor taste given the fact that this type of mentality has always been ingrained in the fabric of America.

Don't get me wrong, every President has had their faults, and I am not blind to Clinton's, either. With that being said, I stick to what I said earlier. If we are judging the best president based on a thriving economy, national security, US being viewed as the gold standard, etc, etc, then, Clinton's reign was the most successful. If you want to take a look at how we have done since then, just look at how the rest of the world views us. Do you ever remember a time the US was viewed so lowly by other nations and people? It sure seems the US has some catching up to do if it ever wants to restore some credibility with other nations.

Again, you're giving credit to clinton for things he had nothing to do with! Do you deny that the cold war(45 years) was over before clinton came into office?
He had NOTHING to do with winning it, Reagan did! So therefore, Reagan deserves credit for that peace, not clinton! If one guy puts out a fire, then leaves, and another guy enters the area, do you give credit to the 2nd guy for putting out the fire just cause he's there now? No!

Also, the computer, software, hardware, internet industries created the economic boom in the 90's, not Clinton! Unless you believe he created the computer and Gore invented the internet! Plus, the economy was already on its way back up when Clinton took office in '93....

As far as the US over indulging, I'd agree that some do, but Clinton helped lay the framework that CHANGED the loan industry's policies of only giving loans to people who can PROVE that they can pay their loans, and then the banks started doing no-doc loans..... The banks would previously weed out people who were possibly over-indulging and couldnt pay! But not later on!

As far as how we are viewed by the rest of the world, unfortunately the rest of the world is given a very skewed account of how competent and effective US leaders are by the overwhelmingly left-ist media in USA, Europe and UK... So they will ALWAYS praise left wing, Democrat politicians in America to their countries! They probably thought Jimmy Carter was great, and they LOVE Obama, even though his policies have not worked here! If they LOVE him so much, they can have him! Come get him....Please!(And I voted for Obama too)

I also voted for Clinton once, in '92.....

Also, I saw someone mention Clarke.... That guy has changed his story about as many times as Clinton couldve taken Bin Laden out! He originally slammed the Clinton administration for the lousy job they did, then changed his story after Bush didnt give him the 'power' he wanted in the CIA!

 

[marsmellow]

the progressive US media let him get away with that lie as well!! In fact, the media repeatedly tried to blame the military for Clinton's actions for years, as have almost the entire progressive left in America! Thats the old "Dont ever hold the Dems accountable" trick

Stop getting your information about "the progressive left" from Fox News and Talk Radio. You're just repeating propaganda and it makes you sound like an idiot. The media and the Democrats are as progressive as Bush was a fiscal conservative. Not at all.

In fact, a lot of progressives dislike Clinton just as much as you do. For a number of reasons, some of which you've already mentioned. He WAS a really overrated president.

There was DADT and DOMA, NAFTA, The Telecom Act, which made it possible for corporations to control the media even more than they already did, The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, which deregulated banks and helped cause this recession, and then the Welfare Reform Bill, which threw a lot off people off welfare...

The economy didn't do well in the 90s because of Reagan though. It was the dot-com bubble that was responsible for the good economy in the 90s. Reagan (and Clinton) had very little to do with that.

Speaking of Reagan, he is extremely overrated, and probably was the worst president in the last 100 years.

 

[Bardeaux]

Do you deny that the cold war(45 years) was over before clinton came into office?
He had NOTHING to do with winning it, Reagan did! So therefore, Reagan deserves credit for that peace,

How exactly was the cold war won by Reagan? He was in office for four years before Gorbachev came to power, and in that time tensions continued to escalate. Gorbachev is the one who started initiating talks with the United States.

It didnt even end under Reagan's watch.

 

[Apostacious]

^^ To be fair, marsmellow, those figures are just the first two years of Reagan's term in office. I assume a lot of Reagan's popularity comes from the fact that he claims to be anti-"big government" and he survived an assassination attempt in the first year of his office. Additionally, the unemployment rate skyrocketed at the beginning of his term, to near double digit levels. Unfortunately, he chose "Reaganomics" (coupled with deficit spending) to deal with the early 80s recession, which inevitably increased the tax rate for the bottom bracket from 14% to 15% and decreased the top bracket from 70% to 28%. This caused the budget deficits, mostly because Reagan was against social programs, but not expanding the military. Therefore, Reaganomics is the only type of "voodoo economics" that has been in action. However, Reaganomics did stimulate the economy to a certain extent, and brought unemployment down to ~7% by the time of his re-election.

One could say that Reagan ended the Cold War. That is not entirely true, and only happened because he outspent the Soviet Union on the military. It was Reagan that escalated the Cold War, and brought back the fears that people felt in the 50s of eminent nuclear war. Once the Soviet Union was collapsing, Reagan basically placed the American flag over Russia and took as much credit as possible for the "end" of the Cold War. Additionally, Reagan's imperialistic nature greatly harmed U.S. reputation abroad, and his fumbling "diplomacy" (selling weapons to fringe groups) basically made the situation that we have today (sans Israel). If he didn't help Iraq fight Iran and vice versa, the U.S. would not have the problems with Iran, and many other Arab nations. Of course, such shady dealings wasn't limited to the middle-east. Therefore, Reagan was ultimately a ballsy, but terrible (at best mediocre) president. In fact, he was more of a puppet than anything.