Didn't know his first wife or childhood nickname, though neither had much to do with his presidency. What's the "honey, I forgot to duck" line from? Sounds familiar.. is that from his commercial/spokesman/corporate shill (most important experience he had prior to becoming president) days?
oh wait, nevermind, just clicked... he said that after getting shot, right?
His most important achievement prior to becoming President was being a corporate spokesman? Seriously? Did you miss that whole "Governor of California" thing?
I didn't say achievement. I said experience. Considering he sold the country out to bankers and corporations, his experience as a corporate spokesman was apparently what he drew upon most when making decisions as president, yes.
Not really. The term was first used by Nixon in 1971, but even then, the actions and tactics to which he was referring to had been around for over 50 years.
His wife became something of a cheerleader for it, but the war on drugs is mostly Nixon's fault. Though... Johnson, Reagan, Bush, Clinton... all contributed toward it and share blame. Obama and Trump made very nominal efforts to try and address it, for obviously very different reasons, but in both cases not nearly enough. Doesn't look like Biden is going to do anything, either. Perhaps once the Nixon generation dies off and politicians aren't scared of their voting power anymore we'll finally be able to end it.
Ronald Reagan is not the worst president ever, but even on his best day he was relatively mediocre. However because he is the only Republican president since Eisenhower to win the popular vote twice (and unlike the other two GOP presidents who were elected to two-terms, he did not leave office in disgrace) the Right reveres him with a religious-like devotion. They have created the myth of 'Ronaldus Magnus' and consider him either the greatest president ever or at least worthy of Mt Rushmore.
Reagan was mostly a bad president. He deliberately ignored congress regarding the Iran-Contra scandal and lied about it to congress and the American people (if it didn't happen so late in his 2nd term he might have been impeached). He also passed up a deal with Gorbachev for almost complete nuclear disarmament because of his attachment to SDI, which never worked anyway. And there is even evidence in the diary he kept for most of his life that he already had Alzheimer's before his 2nd term was up.
So I just saw this, over a year after you wrote it!
I'm flattered that you'd ask my opinion, but I believe that James Buchanan is the worst president ever, since many of his key decisions (and his lack of decisions) helped bring about the Civil War and the deaths of around 750,000 Americans (not to mention all those wounded or those scarred mentally/emotionally after the war).
I'd put Wilson a little lower, but FDR is right where he belongs on that list. I think Teddy would have ranked even higher had the country faced worse crises than it did during his Presidency, but he did not have to lead the country through something as difficult as Lincoln or FDR did.
And while I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with Hdny42's list, how bad do some of those administrations on the "worst" list have to be to rank below William Henry Harrison, whose major accomplishment as President was dying of pneumonia a mere month after taking office?
Most comments on here must be by progressives or socialists. That rating list is a joke as well, besides the first few obvious ones on each. Wilson is on the wrong list altogether. He was the worst type of progressive (possibly socialist) and a raging racist. Meanwhile the Reagan years brought the downfall of the USSR, the best economy since the 50s and ended a two decade downward spiral of political unrest, scandals and bad presidents.
Trump is way worse than Reagan, and Bush Jr. was worse, too, IMO though that is not as clear-cut. Though it would have been hard to see this from 2015.
Seriously Kal get a hobby. You can say republicans are idiots or democrats are idiots, but the people who vote/believe whatever their party tells them are the real idiots.
The real idiots are those that believe whatever they're told by the party? such as those who believe that Trump, current head of the Republican party, is not the worst president in US history - something that independent conservatives, liberals, and non-partisan observers can all pretty much agree on? Cool, thanks for the help sniffing out real idiocy. I'll keep my eyes peeled.
I typically think rather highly of everyone on this site given our shared interest in obscure, mostly useless information. The comments on anything political, religious, philosophical, etc. are beyond disheartening. I often tell people "there is no such thing as an open-minded intellectual". This is true whether you like to admit it or not. When it comes to contentious topics, people like us (including myself far too often) state our opinions as though they are facts. Nobody changes their mind based on facts but rather on emotion. They then seek to back up their feelings with cherry picked factual evidence from science and history. Intellectuals respect their opponents but never actually keep their minds open. The motto is "question everything, well, except for me of course". My point is that all of you quarreling in the comments above need to check your ego at the door. Stop being arrogant and keep your mouth shut. You cannot prove anything to anyone by slandering each other online.
I agree slandering each other is not helpful, but on the other hand I enjoy some of the lively discussions I've seen in the comments, and quite often I learn new things or research a topic further on my own. So IMHO honest debate and open discussion is good, just don't get arrogant or mean-spirited with the comments.
Disagree wholeheartedly. I'll state why, and who knows, maybe even influence someone's opinion.
Most intellectuals I respect are true skeptics. A true skeptic is always open-minded. I'm very open-minded myself. And these people will always change their opinions based on facts and evidence, and actively resist things like beliefs based on emotion, confirmation bias, etc. It's not easy doing this, it is human nature, but it is possible.
Stating an opinion with confidence doesn't mean you are closed-minded. You'll annoy fewer people if you take the time to carefully state that everything you say is of course up for debate, and after every opinion add a caveat that you are not infallible, but this is tedious. I'm always open to the possibility that I might be wrong but I'm not going to add this as a post statement to everything I type.
People also often confuse a lot of different things (confidence, different opinions, knowledge) for arrogance. Especially people who prefer not to participate in contentious conversations. This is the majority of people out there. Maybe they believe that, because they would choose not to participate in a debate, other people doing so must have something wrong with them. They might perceive it as arrogance (oh, they think their opinions are sooo important and everyone just has to know what they think!), or pugnacity (oh! people are expressing different opinions! They must be fighting! Why can't we all get along!?), when really some people just enjoy a lively debate. If you do not... then don't read the comments. You'll just find them upsetting. And aside from Internet trolls, nobody is trying to insult, slander, or offend you.
Can't we all just get along? As pointed out above this is not a political website, nor should it be. No one will affirm Reagan's place in history via this string of comments. Now let's all get back to solving quizzes. :)
It was a tremendous achievement to deflect attention from a bombing in Lebanon by invading Grenada with 6,000 Marines, fighting off nearly one hundred airport construction workers over the course of six hours, and then awarding those Marines 7,500 medals? Is that a good start?
I know. And I've only ever read and heard bad things about Reagan, except for rather insubstantial claims (he was "optimistic" and "honest", or, see above, "a president with a backbone", etc.). Yet I'm willing to listen to the other side and see where they're really coming from. I'm curious.
Reagan fans I think would say that he was a great communicator and charismatic leader. They credit his charisma and leadership with defeating the Soviet Union and winning the Cold War. They see him as tough on foreign policy. They also credit the economic boom of the 80s to Reaganomics - tax cuts and deregulation aimed at benefiting the wealthy elites and encouraging growth on Wall Street. (and ignore the recession that came shortly afterward) I agree with maybe 30% of this.
He was President when terrorists killed 300 Americans in one spot in a foreign country....which obviously the President didn't detonate the terrorist bomb, but...Benghazi!!!!
Never understood the partisan hacks' jump in logic there.
After the Obama administration got the 2008 economic crash turned around, the country had 75 consecutive months of job growth - an historical first. The S&P 500 almost tripled under Obama after it reached a low in March 2009, shortly after he assumed office. Unemployment was cut in half. Annual GDP growth after 2009 was a healthy and sustainable 2-3%. Some quarters over 4%. There was no recession under Obama just 8 years of growth.
If you look at all these and other economic indicators over the Obama and Trump years it is easy to see that they started their upward trend and then just continued along the same trend lines when Trump took over, if they did not falter and slow down. (and then, of course, eventually Trump's catastrophically inept handling of the pandemic resulted in more economic damage to the USA than any similarly developed country) Even Trump admitted, before deciding he was running for office, that Democrats were better for the economy than Republicans.
A lovely infographic here. Hard to argue with the hard data. Though this graphic only goes from Hoover through Bush Jr. If it included Obama and Trump then it would be even more lopsided. Some Republican administrations saw bigger growth than the average Democratic one, but typically that growth was not sustainable and led to either recessions or crashes. Republicans favoring deregulation means bigger, less predictable swings of the market, greater wealth concentration at the top, and a government less equipped to be able to respond to crises when they arise.
oh.. forgot to mention.. under Obama we also had 8 years of a shrinking deficit. Trump is the first president in history to *explode* the deficit during peacetime when the economy was great. No other president has managed to do that. Where's the tea party now?
Seems like TraderJoe went through and deleted almost all of his comments on the presidential quizzes. He commented above something about Trump's or Reagan's great economies probably, or Obama's being weak. I forget.
No, @TraderJoes has been hidden, as well as @Jackinthebox. We don't appreciate users whose only contribution to JetPunk is partisan political argumentation. @Kal, you are mostly grandfathered in.
I don't make partisan political arguments; certainly not only. I adhere as closely as possible to objective reality. Reality in a 2-party system isn't always perfectly centrist, as much as this may upset those committed to being non-partisan (as best they can with the limited information they have, often so limited because these types don't enjoy reading about politics or conversing on the subject). Those who disagree about my posts may themselves be partisan, I've noticed that plenty of times, sometimes even in their own well-meaning but somewhat hamstrung endeavors to be or appear neutral themselves. I've had posts deleted for stating uncontroversial objective fact that may have appeared to those who don't know any better as partisan political opinion or argumentation. I've had posts deleted that stated no opinion at all; just listed the voting records at USSC nominee confirmation hearings. Not to imply that TraderJoe was muted unfairly, but this policy may be overused.
Yeah, I was surprised not to see anything relating to Grenada in the questions. I'm not an American and that was something I knew about, unlike some much more obscure to me questions (e.g. nicknames).
Driving past Dixon, IL on I-88 is pretty inspiring because it shows that even someone from a dump like that can become president. Although I hate the war on drugs and the effect it's had on black incarceration I do have respect for Reagan.
I can't believe I forgot Walter Mondale, my childhood was scarred by memories of my dad and his mother arguing bitterly over that election...she was convinced Reagan was the devil incarnate.
oh wait, nevermind, just clicked... he said that after getting shot, right?
and a disastrous president. Yes, he sold out to the bankers and other "elites". Hallmark of a former Democrat.
Reagan was mostly a bad president. He deliberately ignored congress regarding the Iran-Contra scandal and lied about it to congress and the American people (if it didn't happen so late in his 2nd term he might have been impeached). He also passed up a deal with Gorbachev for almost complete nuclear disarmament because of his attachment to SDI, which never worked anyway. And there is even evidence in the diary he kept for most of his life that he already had Alzheimer's before his 2nd term was up.
I'm flattered that you'd ask my opinion, but I believe that James Buchanan is the worst president ever, since many of his key decisions (and his lack of decisions) helped bring about the Civil War and the deaths of around 750,000 Americans (not to mention all those wounded or those scarred mentally/emotionally after the war).
My top and bottom 10:
Top:
1.) Lincoln
2.) FDR
3.) Washington
4.) Wilson
5.) Teddy Roosevelt
6.) Jefferson
7.) Truman
8.) Eisenhower
9.) Obama
10.) Jackson
Bottom:
1.) Buchanan
2.) Harding
3.) George W. Bush
4.) Nixon
5.) Hoover
6.) Andrew Johnson
7.) Pierce
8.) Fillmore
9.) Tyler
10.) Carter
Rating the presidents since FDR died in 1945:
1.) Truman
2.) Eisenhower
3.) Obama
4.) JFK
5.) LBJ
6 (tie) George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton
8.) Reagan
9.) Ford
10.) Carter
11.) Nixon
12.) George W. Bush
Most intellectuals I respect are true skeptics. A true skeptic is always open-minded. I'm very open-minded myself. And these people will always change their opinions based on facts and evidence, and actively resist things like beliefs based on emotion, confirmation bias, etc. It's not easy doing this, it is human nature, but it is possible.
Stating an opinion with confidence doesn't mean you are closed-minded. You'll annoy fewer people if you take the time to carefully state that everything you say is of course up for debate, and after every opinion add a caveat that you are not infallible, but this is tedious. I'm always open to the possibility that I might be wrong but I'm not going to add this as a post statement to everything I type.
People also often confuse a lot of different things (confidence, different opinions, knowledge) for arrogance. Especially people who prefer not to participate in contentious conversations. This is the majority of people out there. Maybe they believe that, because they would choose not to participate in a debate, other people doing so must have something wrong with them. They might perceive it as arrogance (oh, they think their opinions are sooo important and everyone just has to know what they think!), or pugnacity (oh! people are expressing different opinions! They must be fighting! Why can't we all get along!?), when really some people just enjoy a lively debate. If you do not... then don't read the comments. You'll just find them upsetting. And aside from Internet trolls, nobody is trying to insult, slander, or offend you.
Never understood the partisan hacks' jump in logic there.
If you look at all these and other economic indicators over the Obama and Trump years it is easy to see that they started their upward trend and then just continued along the same trend lines when Trump took over, if they did not falter and slow down. (and then, of course, eventually Trump's catastrophically inept handling of the pandemic resulted in more economic damage to the USA than any similarly developed country) Even Trump admitted, before deciding he was running for office, that Democrats were better for the economy than Republicans.
oh.. forgot to mention.. under Obama we also had 8 years of a shrinking deficit. Trump is the first president in history to *explode* the deficit during peacetime when the economy was great. No other president has managed to do that. Where's the tea party now?
"The bombing begins in 5 minutes."?