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:
5.) Teddy Roosevelt
3.) George W. Bush
6.) Andrew Johnson
Rating the presidents since FDR died in 1945:
6 (tie) George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton
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."?