Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-13-2015, 09:31 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Gilead
12,716 posts, read 7,812,515 times
Reputation: 11338

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil P View Post
And traditionally the pre civil war presidents were voted some of the worst. It will be interesting to see if Bush trumps them or stays just in the bottom 10.
Good point. We probably won't know for another 50 years how history ultimately views Bush. Some pre-civil war Presidents, specifically Buchannan, are among the worst. I am going to go out on a limb and say history will judge Bush as the worst of the post-WWII era and among the top 3 worst in all history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-13-2015, 09:37 AM
 
2,014 posts, read 1,529,071 times
Reputation: 1925
Quote:
Originally Posted by ORION83 View Post
Bush Jr. Without a single doubt in my mind. Right behind him is Reagan and Lincoln.
He's in really good company then. I'll take that triumvirate over any three Democrats you care to mention.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 09:40 AM
 
2,014 posts, read 1,529,071 times
Reputation: 1925
Quote:
Originally Posted by pollyrobin View Post
and then we can throw in some of those pesky historians

"In an informal survey of 109 professional historians conducted over a three-week period through the History News Network, 98.2 percent assessed the presidency of Mr. Bush to be a failure while 1.8 percent classified it as a success.
Amazing how that percentage of historians almost exactly matches the percentage of academic historians who are self-declared leftist Democrats and who support the Democrat party and all its policies with their time, money and teachings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 09:42 AM
 
2,014 posts, read 1,529,071 times
Reputation: 1925
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
Worst president in history was Woodrow Wilson (D, NJ).

• Started the war on drugs (Harrison act of 1914). Before that any American could walk into any corner pharmacy and legally purchase opium, coca, or marihuana. Wilson laid the foundation of the modern nanny state with such progressive initiatives as the war on prostitution and prohibition, which he nominally opposed, but failed to stop.

•Started the concept of US as world police by getting the US into WWI even though it was not our concern. And WWI of course set the stage for WWII.

•Created the federal income tax and thus vouchsafed the dominance of Washington DC and leviathan centralized government.

•Was an overt racist who re-segregated the federal work force and military after it had been desegregated by the Republicans.

Quite a job by our only PhD president, whose program marches on 100 years later under Pres. Barack Obama.
Wilson was very bad, FDR was very bad, Carter was very bad, Obama is very bad. Pretty hard to pick the worst out of that bunch.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 09:54 AM
 
Location: San Diego
50,288 posts, read 47,043,365 times
Reputation: 34073
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wanderer0101 View Post
Wilson was very bad, FDR was very bad, Carter was very bad, Obama is very bad. Pretty hard to pick the worst out of that bunch.
ACA, DACA, recess appts, firearms,plus, we are still hovering over the middle east. He's got plenty of time to do further damage. I think it's an easy win.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 10:01 AM
 
Location: Pacific NW
9,437 posts, read 7,369,351 times
Reputation: 7979
The verdict is in - liberals are still out of touch with reality and refuse to accept anything that is contrary to their skewed world view.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 10:09 AM
 
2,014 posts, read 1,529,071 times
Reputation: 1925
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer View Post
ACA, DACA, recess appts, firearms,plus, we are still hovering over the middle east. He's got plenty of time to do further damage. I think it's an easy win.
Could be but I know that the damage Wilson and FDR did is still plaguing us today. Carter set us up for many of the problems we're facing now. I don't know for sure what the long term effect of Obama is going to be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 10:12 AM
 
Location: Taos NM
5,355 posts, read 5,134,067 times
Reputation: 6781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wanderer0101 View Post
Wilson was very bad, FDR was very bad, Carter was very bad, Obama is very bad. Pretty hard to pick the worst out of that bunch.
FDR is in the top three from historical ratings according to Wikipedia. When looking at what happened to the rest of the world during that time, I think we have a lot to be thankful for with FDR, even if some of his policies were carried out beyond there time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618 View Post
Good point. We probably won't know for another 50 years how history ultimately views Bush. Some pre-civil war Presidents, specifically Buchannan, are among the worst. I am going to go out on a limb and say history will judge Bush as the worst of the post-WWII era and among the top 3 worst in all history.
That I can agree with. The post WWII presidents are within peoples timeframe of memory, so they are the ones most compared to, while few take into account presidents like Rutherford B Hayes into the mix.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 10:16 AM
 
1,198 posts, read 1,179,996 times
Reputation: 1530
Bush was the worst, next it will be Obama, after that it will be the next POTUS.

Maybe these presidents were just average presidents in a really bad time?

Somehow I seem to think that if a guys like Richard Nixon or JFK faced today's technology and media, they would have burned them at the stake.

The people on this forum are either really young, have short memories, or delusional. I suspect it's a combination of all 3 lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2015, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Ayrsley
4,713 posts, read 9,703,287 times
Reputation: 3824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
The verdict is in - liberals are still out of touch with reality and refuse to accept anything that is contrary to their skewed world view.
The same can be said of die-hard Republicans. Those people who deperately cling to either side of the political fence, talk about how great your side is, and constantly villify the other side, are all idiots.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:13 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top