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.
What we saw with this current presidency should be an eye opener. The lies, the perpetuation of conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory that unfortunately too many American's believed like gospel. Don't forget over 70 million people voted for a dictator wanna be. That's disturbing. What's equally as disturbing is that out of the 330 million American's only around 150 million of us voted.
We all need to wake up and smell the coffee if we want change. Our votes are far more powerful than corrupt politicians. Lets use that power for change.
There's also the fact, though, that he ran initially as a publicity stunt, a from of game show, not expecting to win. So IDK if he even really fits the mold the OP is proposing.
But let's look at the US Presidency with a wider lens, as an example. Were JFK or FDR power-hungry "worst people"? Eisenhower, Woodrow Wilson? Obama? I'm not sure where the OP is getting this. Angela Merkel, some kind of demon? lol. Sure, it happens, but it's not a given.
What we saw with this current presidency should be an eye opener. The lies, the perpetuation of conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory that unfortunately too many American's believed like gospel. Don't forget over 70 million people voted for a dictator wanna be. That's disturbing. What's equally as disturbing is that out of the 330 million American's only around 150 million of us voted.
We all need to wake up and smell the coffee if we want change. Our votes are far more powerful than corrupt politicians. Lets use that power for change.
Well, I'll sleep a lot easier on Jan 21, 2021. Everything will be back the way it should be.
Do you think it's even humanly possible for people to come up with a system wherein the most evil/toxic people to exist gain ultimate power, or do you think the most horrendous and evil people will always have the biggest advantage regardless of whatever kind of system is set up? A world where things aren't ruled by all the mean guys/girls from high school?
Nope. Because one can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time but one can never fool all of the people all of the time.
It seems that a limited number of people are interested in having power over the rest. In one group we find people who see power as a force for doing good, in the other group, people seek power for their own reasons and interests. America has seen people from both groups occupy the places of power, but, ultimately, those who primarily want their self interests served usually succeed in that quest-- simply because they have no scruples that could serve as a restraint of their power. In that realistic view of power it's easy to see the reasoning behind most political promises, not to mention how a lesser educated populace will continue to elect those who promise them the most. Self interest, the real political motivator..Here's Orwell's take on power as a modern day self serving construct.
O'Brien answering for Winston, in the book- 1984: “Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives.
They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
― George Orwell, 1984
The problem we have in the US is much more complicated than just "don't vote for them." Usually, they are our only option. Yes, there may be two people on the ballot, but they are usually both as bad as the other. The system was set up and created by the wealthy and elite and, let's be honest, crooks, liars, and cheats of little moral conviction. It was set up by them to protect them and to allow them and others like them to stay in power.
A poor person with no political connections doesn't really have a snowball's chance in he** of gaining any powerful political office. And that is no accident. Does it happen every now and then? Yes. But instances are too few and far between to change anything or be a factor in changing the system.
Impossible,
Politics is the art of tricking people into supporting your idea thinking that you want the greater good for them
Basically, a politician is a professional scam artist
Wow such deep thought is required to properly discuss the O.P.'s post that I kind of thought it belonged more to the Philosophy forum. Back in college, several metaphysics and political philosophy classes widely discussed topics like these and no good conclusion had been reached. The problem is how do you define qualities such as "bad" or "worst"? To try to come to an agreement on something well-defined would require a quantitative system that would take infinity to devise and as you know humans are not infinite beings. Any other attempt is flawed. If for instance, you come up with a system that prohibits any one individual from gaining too much power, the individuals enforcing the system on that one individual themselves will have too much power. So who then is "bad" or "worst"? In practice, no government could ever govern in such a system because everyone would be too busy checking each other.
Do you think it's even humanly possible for people to come up with a system wherein the most evil/toxic people to exist gain ultimate power, or do you think the most horrendous and evil people will always have the biggest advantage regardless of whatever kind of system is set up? A world where things aren't ruled by all the mean guys/girls from high school?
Most of the Presidents and candidates have been doleful. It the U.S. at least there are plenty of times that on the surface the major candidates were horrible, but some, such as Andrew Jackson, turned out to be pretty good:
1836 - Van Buren v. William Henry Harrison (and multiple other candidates) - Van Buren won and had horrible Presidency;
1840 - Van Buren v. William Henry Harrison - Harrison won, died about a month into his term. Tyler finished out term, had horrible Presidency;
1848 - Zachary Taylor v. Lewis Cass v. Van Buren - All horrible, Taylor won, died, and term was served out by Millard Fillmore. one of the worst
1852 - Franklin Pierce defeated Winfield Scott. Scott was probably not garbage but Pierce has been consistently rated among the worst.
1856 - Buchanan defeated Fremont. Fremont was probably not garbage (but unelectable because he was too abolitionist) but Buchanan has been consistently rated among the worst.
I am leaving out 1860, 1864 (Lincoln one of greats), 1868 and 1872 (Grant's legacy looks better with time and Chernow)
1876 - Rutherford Hayes v. Samuel Tilden - Hayes was bad enough that there was a serious pitch to bring Grant back
1880 - I don't know enough to have any opinion;
1884, 1888, 1892 - Grover Cleveland defeats James Blaine - Grover Cleveland almost became a one termer but his successor, Benjamin Harrison, was even worse, putting Grover back in. Only time a President served non-consecutive terms;
1896 & 1900 - McKinley defeats William Jennings Bryan - The less said about either the better.
1904 - Theodore Roosevelt - A true great.
1908- Taft defeats William Jennings Bryan - The less said about either the better. Taft has the distinction about being outpolled by his mentor, Theodore Roosevelt, running as a Third-Party candidate
1912 -Racist Woodrow Wilson defeats Taft and Roosevelt. Roosevelt had been a great President so not sure this qualifies as an "all sides losers" race.
1916 - I don't know enough about Charles Even Hughes, Wilson's opponent, to have any opinion;
1920 - Syphilitic Warren Gamaliel Harding wins. I don't know enough about James Cox, Harding's opponent, to have any opinion.
1924 - Coolidge, a mediocrity, defeats John Davies, whose name I didn't know until just now and I'm a political junkie.
1928 - Herbert Hoover, nothing special, defeats Al Smith, a New York machine politician
1932, 1936, 1940, 1944 - Won by FDR, a President I rank with Buchanan and Pierce. Willkie and Dewey, 1940 and 1944 opponents, didn't stand a chance.
1948 Truman was a great President, doesn't count
1952, 1956 - Eisenhower, a boring, evil mediocrity defeats impractical egghead Adlai Stevenson. My father idolized Stevenson but I don't know what was so great about him.
1968 - Nixon defeats Humphrey & Wallace. I don't know if this counts because Humphrey had real potential. As we all know Nixon was a disgraceful lowlife.
1972 - Nixon defeats McGovern - My Dad and I, in one of the last things we did while my Dad lived, campaigned and handed out literature for McGovern. I played in marching band for campaign event. In hindsight I think McGovern would have quickly become unpopular and ineffective. Watergate and Nixon's fraudulent handling of the economy to create a chimera of good times are legendary. Glad he resigned in disgrace, though I support his pardon by Ford.
1976 - Again I was wrong. I went to Democratic Convention on a press pass and was enthusiastically for Carter. He proved disastrous.
1980 & 1984 - Reagan, a great, won, though I voted for Cater in 1980.
2000 - Neither Bush II nor Gore were great choices. I voted for Gore.
2004 - Neither Bush II nor Kerry were great choices. I voted for Bush II.
2008 - Neither Obama nor McCain were great choices. I voted for McCain.
2012 - Romney seemed like a genuine man of quality. I voted for him. He lost.
2016 - HRC v. Trump, both terrible. I voted for HRC and thought Trump was actually a good President.
2020 - Too early to say but looks like 2020's dystopia continues with choice of Biden.
I have highlighted all the ones I felt yielded either a great candidate or great President. The pickings are sparse. We are a great country in spite of all this.
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.
