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)
View Poll Results: Do you think FDR was a good President?
Yes 84 59.57%
No 49 34.75%
Not sure 8 5.67%
Voters: 141. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:27 AM
 
4,338 posts, read 2,263,069 times
Reputation: 5589

Advertisements

I think winning 4 elections in a row pretty much speaks for itself.

Just try to imagine any modern president at the table with Stalin and Churchill or any modern president moving another head of state into the White House for months; that alone should garner some respect points. As for his legacy, that is for the historians to decide along with whatever predisposed notions the person asking the questions might possess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:39 AM
 
4,665 posts, read 2,637,440 times
Reputation: 3342
FDR will forever be remember for his contributions in WW2, and for that he will be remembered as a great president, as he should be. I disagree with a lot of his domestic policies, but he was the right man for the job at that time. So yes, he was a good president. He led the US and the world through one if its darkest times. He is one of the top presidents with Washington, Lincoln, and Eisenhower.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:41 AM
 
9,984 posts, read 6,760,549 times
Reputation: 5613
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacanegro View Post
that is for the historians to decide.
Historians decide nothing.

They fall along political lines just like everyone else.

Bias in "history" and all the human sciences is the new normal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:42 AM
 
5,423 posts, read 2,009,498 times
Reputation: 6885
Of course FDR was one the greatest presidents in the history of America. He battled the Great Depression, gave us America's most successful government program (Social Security), won a world war on two fronts -- and he did all this while struggling with a physical disability.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Texas
35,225 posts, read 19,282,093 times
Reputation: 20841
Quote:
Originally Posted by branh0913 View Post
Basic economic theory honestly. FDR mass interventionalism couldn't get the economy moving, and only made things worse. The same way QE really doesn't solve any issues, just make things worse in general.
Here's your chance to back up your bold words with some economic analysis.

No right wing opinion pieces, please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
33,255 posts, read 20,087,069 times
Reputation: 12991
Compared to the 3 president who preceded him he was pretty good. At least he actively tried to address the problems caused by the Great Depression.

You have to balance the good with the bad. On the whole, I think the good he did significantly out shines the bad he did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 10:27 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
4,370 posts, read 5,141,532 times
Reputation: 3896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Here's your chance to back up your bold words with some economic analysis.

No right wing opinion pieces, please.
It's a philosophical concern. The whole idea of aggregate demand is that it causes a great economy. But the truth is aggregate demand is the RESULT of a strong economy. So interventionalist like FDR committed something called the "broken window" fallacy.

What kept the economy stimulated wasn't FDR polices, but the fact that we were no longer in perpetual war, the population was growing, and we already had production. And many historians would even say it was when he stopped trying to intervene, is only when things got better.


FDR was the first president to give legitimacy to the entire keynesian school of economics. So the idea of QE and "helicoptering" money became mainstream. Yet it is the Austrian school predicted most fiscal disasters when Keynesians couldn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
33,255 posts, read 20,087,069 times
Reputation: 12991
Like Nehru, Roosevelt also had believe in big projects with ensuring welfare of the society thus heavy taxes levied on the corporates and wealthy one and poor were taken into the major consideration in his tenure. Reform programs such as social security act, new control over banks , dealing with unemployment made his administration to set great example before the world.

He significantly contributed to the formation of United Nation and revised the US behavior with his neighbor by " Good Neighbor policy". He proposed neutrality legislation to keep US out of the war in Europe.

You can't judge a president based SOLELY on hindsight, nor can you ignore historical background. So I would say FDR is perhaps one of the best.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 10:35 AM
 
Location: Nescopeck, Penna. (birthplace)
12,351 posts, read 7,503,405 times
Reputation: 15950
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981 View Post
Compared to the 3 president who preceded him he was pretty good. At least he actively tried to address the problems caused by the Great Depression.
THAT was his biggest mistake, (as it was Hoover's, but not Coolidge's). Attempts to further tamper with the economy by both Roosevelt and his immediate predecessor prolonged the Great Depression, and what finally put an end to the folderol was the Supreme Court decision invalidating the National Recovery Act in the spring of 1935.

Quote:
You have to balance the good with the bad. On the whole, I think the good he did significantly out shines the bad he did.
I have no quarrel with the concept of a basic societal "safety net"; every industrialized nation has one, and in fact, a "bare bones" system of public assistance, administered and policed at the local level, was in place in most of the Northeast and Midwest prior to the onset of the Depression. It could have been expanded and reformed without the imposition of Federal "standards" which actually set the stage for the creation of a bureaucratic empire -- and formalized imbalances and loopholes which have been exploited by the unscrupulous at the bottom of the societal heap, and their Leftist political allies, ever since.

On the international stage, I can give Roosevelt much greater credit, since he saw the threat of totalitarianism early on. My principal reservation is that he didn't see institutionalized Marxism as at least as great a threat; this had been amply demonstrated by Stalin's collectivization of agriculture and engineered famine in the Ukraine in the early Thirties.

The biggest "what if" in this assessment is "What if Roosevelt had not replaced the blatant Kremlin sycophant Henry Wallace with Harry Truman in 1944?"

(I voted "not sure", BTW.)

Last edited by 2nd trick op; 07-29-2016 at 10:46 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 10:38 AM
 
Location: Newport Beach, California
33,255 posts, read 20,087,069 times
Reputation: 12991
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2nd trick op View Post
THAT was his biggest mistake, (as it was Hoover's, but not Coolidge's). Attempts to further tamper with the economy by both Roosevelt and his immediate predecessor prolonged the Great Depression, and what finally put an end to the folderol was the Supreme Court decision invalidating the National Recovery Act in the spring of 1935.



I have no quarrel with the concept of a basic societal "safety net"; every industrialized nation has one, and in fact, a "bare bones" system of public assistance, administered and policed at the local level, was in place in most of the Northeast and Midwest prior to the onset of the Depression. It could have been expanded and reformed without the imposition of Federal "standards" which actually set the stage for the creation of a bureaucratic empire -- and formalized imbalances and loopholes which have been exploited by the unscrupulous at the bottom of the societal heap, and their Leftist political allies, ever since.

On the international stage, I can give Roosevelt much greater credit, since he saw the threat of totalitarianism early on. My principal reservation is that he didn't see institutionalized Marxism as at least as great a threat; this had been amply demonstrated by Stalin's collectivization of agriculture and engineered famine in the Ukraine in the early Thirties.

The biggest "what if" in this assessment is "What if Roosevelt had not replaced the blatant Kremlin sycophant Henry Wallace with Harry Truman in 1944?
You made some interesting point and I do agree.

However, I've made myself clear in my previous post that you CANNOT judge a president based solely on 20/20 hindsight, nor can you ignore the historical background.

When he came into power, the U.S. was a broken country. Both people and physical assets were sitting unutilized. Land not planted, factories locked, people begging on the street, the elderly in hopelessness most of all.

When he died, the U.S. was the strongest nation on earth. Social Security protected most of the elderly from poverty. The CCC and WPA had build or renewed much of the nation's infrastructure.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top