Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Gee, as decided by average person, who don't have the background to make an intelligent comparison. Show me a poll from historians and we'll have something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmnita
nor do historians always have it right: best, worst, middle is still very subjective. And btw there was a time, a few years ago that even the historians, who, normally lean to the left did place him in the top 5 modern day Presidents. It has been a few years and I am not going to take the time to research this.
I may risk being called an elitist, but the knowledge the 'average person' knows about historical presidents could fit into a thimble.
Even during Reagan's term, polls asked these average people which policies Reagan favored and the results were that most had no idea. There is a reason JFK, Reagan and Clinton are most popular recent ex-presidents. People have no fathom about presidents over the last 100 years.
Most of this is Republican hero worship of Reagan. Reagan was at best an average president in certain times and took credit for events not his doing. Republicans credit him for the collapse of the Soviet Union. Doing so is like the rooster taking credit for the sun rising. It happened while he was president. But most ordinary people haven't the depth to see that.
I may risk being called an elitist, but the knowledge the 'average person' knows about historical presidents could fit into a thimble.
Even during Reagan's term, polls asked these average people which policies Reagan favored and the results were that most had no idea. There is a reason JFK, Reagan and Clinton are most popular recent ex-presidents. People have no fathom about presidents over the last 100 years.
Most of this is Republican hero worship of Reagan. Reagan was at best an average president in certain times and took credit for events not his doing. Republicans credit him for the collapse of the Soviet Union. Doing so is like the rooster taking credit for the sun rising. It happened while he was president. But most ordinary people haven't the depth to see that.
That's why polls like this are meaningless.
I would hope that you can see clearly enough to make the same rudimentary analysis of the lefts hero, Slick Willie.
I may risk being called an elitist, but the knowledge the 'average person' knows about historical presidents could fit into a thimble.
Even during Reagan's term, polls asked these average people which policies Reagan favored and the results were that most had no idea. There is a reason JFK, Reagan and Clinton are most popular recent ex-presidents. People have no fathom about presidents over the last 100 years.
Most of this is Republican hero worship of Reagan. Reagan was at best an average president in certain times and took credit for events not his doing. Republicans credit him for the collapse of the Soviet Union. Doing so is like the rooster taking credit for the sun rising. It happened while he was president. But most ordinary people haven't the depth to see that.
That's why polls like this are meaningless.
Well yes, you do come across as an elitist but part of what you are saying is pretty much what I said. Polls mean very little. It is easier to like the nice guys, Clinton, with all his personal faults was likeable: Kennedy was good looking, had a young family, an attractive wife and died a horrible death; of course he is perceived as being a wonderful Pres. even though very few of us even remember that much about his time in office and after his death we learned more about his womanizing. And yes, Reagan just made us feel good to be Americans.
As for great Presidents, it is hard for anyone, regardless of whether they are average Joe's or historians to really determine "great" it is still subjective. If nothing else, Reagan came out as being a better Pres than many thought he would be going in. Now your mention about bringing down the Soviet union, of course he didn't do this solely on his own, these things are in the works for years. Now, what about the left, and yes, that would be you, who would like to give Obama credit for getting B. L or blaming Bush for the recession. It works both ways, don't you think?
odanny said: The country is different, people who reject progress and wish to keep America in the 19th Century are being replaced by people of color who reject the retrograde policies of people like Reagan
You said it, so you must believe it.
If you aren't a racist, you have a funny way of sounding like one.
The point I was making is that in the 60s and 70s, the anti-establishment anti-war extremists sounded exactly like you sound now. I heard the same words from the likes of the original Black Panthers and CORE. You call yourself a progressive, as if it actually means progress. The reality is that you are spewing the same kind of rhetorical nonsense as any anarchist, racist, and extremist group throughout history. You are stuck in the past and claim it to be progress.
I was in my late 20s and early 30s when Reagan was in office. If you were middle class and not hurt by Reagan's policies, you have a short memory. If you were wealthy, you did well.
believe me, I have never been wealthy, but very much middle class, as is most of my family. Pray tell how were you hurt by his policies. My oldest is a little younger than you: she and her husband were doing very well then and still are. Today, their kids are in the same boat they were in the 80s. As I said, except for student loans, none are suffering, all have decent jobs and are living a very typical middle class life style.
You made the comment, we are still suffering from Reagans policies; pray tell, do you have any idea how many young people are traveling, taking their kids on vacations we only dreamed about when our kids were growing up or how many of the young people today are able to buy homes we couldn't afford until we were in our mid 40s. I could go on and on; I just do not see how you can really think we suffered then or now under his policies?
No matter what you say about Carter, he doesn't have two failed wars under his belt.
4500 dead Americans over non existent weapons of mass destruction. Shameful.
Oh, they existed. They were recently used in Syria.
That aside, we should have been out a day after we toppled Saddam.
As for Afghanistan: bottomless pit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
