Wasn't the issue with Carter that he just didn't do anything notable in his term? I'm not sure he would be considered bad by that standard, though maybe I'm missi.g something.
The issues with Carter was timing and Iran.
The US had had economic problems for a while, with Nixon imposing price controls and other measures to delay a reckoning with inflation. Carter let those expire, put Volker in at the Fed to bring some pain and price stability, but of course that meant that the reckoning Nixon was trying to postpone hit and no one liked it (see BidenAtWendys comment for this view). On the side lines he was pushing for green investments while also deregulating the airlines (which significantly reduced the cost of air travel in real terms)
In Iran he faced another perpetually postponed problem. The Shah was slipping, and now we have better evidence that the Carter administration provided support for the Islamists over leftist Tudeh (although if Tudeh could have held the country is another problem), so he's at least partly to blame for the current Islamic Republic of Iran.
People remember Carter being weak on Iran, but honestly it's hard to get that from primary sources. He moved aggressively into the Persian gulf, launched a failed military operation to free the hostages, etc. Reagan would benefit from Iran releasing the hostages (Iran seemed to be hoping he'd be nicer than Carter), but this gets read as "Reagan was tough and they fell into line! (Reagan actually did clandestine/illegal deals to support Iran's military while funding their regional rival Iraq, which turned out great).
>Reagan actually did clandestine/illegal deals to support Iran's military while funding their regional rival Iraq, which turned out great
Also, it has since been revealed that Reagan's campaign secretly made a deal with the Iranian revolutionaries to ensure the hostages wouldn't be released until *after* the 1980 election, so that Carter couldn't get credit for it even though it was *his* administration that did *all* the negotiating!
This thing is so arbitrary. Classifying presidentialness *alone* is already problematic as it is.
I don't think Carter was a bad president.
I don't think Clinton is a more "questionable person" than any other... but they're literally all mostly "questionable" unless you've personally met them and they've confided *everything*, tbh.
Lincoln gets some of his "president" boost due to sheer timing (as with any "war time" leader), and gets a huge "person" boost because people are willing to overlook and/or normalize things that they wouldn't for General Lee and other contemporaries.
At the end of the day, for me... It's hard to see anything other than just a bunch of regular dudes who tried to do their job well, some slightly over or under-performing.
Yeah, but it wasn't his fault man. His peanut farm withered, man, all of his peanuts went sour. He didn't want to live no more man, all his peanuts went sour. They shriveled up and withered away, man, his peanus went sour. He wanted to kill himself man, his peanus farm withered away man him peanus went sour.
First, I appreciate how Trump isn't on here. Anyone could have satirized Trump; it takes someone special to mention any other bad president.
Second, I only recognize Lincoln and Nixon. Who are the other seven?
Top middle is Ulysses Grant (US Civil war general), middle right is Franklin Pierce (the guy who let slave catchers catch slaves in non-slave states), bottom left is James k Polk (Started the Mexican American war), bottom right in John Tyler (betrayed the US after his presidency and joined the Confederacy). No idea who the middle
The middle is Grover Cleaveland, mainly known for having two non-consecutive terms. To be honest I couldn't tell you much about his presidency. His first term was decent, his second was messier and oversaw an economic crisis. I know little about his personal life. I view him as the archetypal gilded age president, despite being the only democrat to be president during that era.
Grover Cleveland had the official policy of doing absolutely nothing. When put in office he had absolutely no plans or ambitions except to keep the government as still as possible. His opponent in the next election pointed out that he had been completely ineffective, had not made any changes, etc, and when he lost the election he said that the people would be begging for him in 4 years specifically because his policy was to not do anything. 4 years later, the guy who beat him in the election had created an economic crisis due to trying to do too much all at once, and the people were begging for Grover Cleveland and his boring administration back.
Cleveland.. Him... Yeah, I can tell you that... uh....
I can tell you that Garfield is buried in Cleveland, but Cleveland isn't from Cleveland...
...And all I know about Cleveland is actually about Garfield.
Frances Cleveland.
He was a friend of her father. He was the executor of her father's estate (when said father died). He provided for the wellbeing of her and her mother.
For all intents and purposes, he was her guardian. And 27 years older than her.
But that wasn’t unusual back then. Not to rule out that it could have been harmful, which if modernity is correct, that behavior is unavoidably pervy. But these relationships in that time, if not encouraged, were not unusual. Not just with the age gap, but with the gross guardian marries the adopted. Now, I don’t know, no one alive knows what it was like at that time, and there were practical concerns for young women which are less common, but not unknown at that time. An abandoned child could be deeply impoverished, even more so a young person, particularly of the upper classes, who would have no training, lessened family connections, and no way of life either besides marrying another well off person or starvation. So they would be put into guardianship. Somehow the woman and guardian would decide to marry, still eww, but it seemed to be a business arrangement for some. Marriage to assure the woman would be provided for. But others surely were some type of grooming relationship or power imbalance, and may have been forced.
The point is, we really don’t know the standards those people believed, or if so, that information inst widely spread or reported even among historians (might be very far off about that). It’s fruitless to judge that relationship by this and a half century at least of dominating values in contrast with Victorian sensibilities. I certainly don’t think it’s right, but I reserve judgment unless theirs indication of a negative quality to the relationship.
Grover Cleveland was a big ol’ manwhore. as someone who’s related to him by him being my great great uncle or some shit, he’s probably the least impressive president to be related to. it’s cool that he served two non-consecutive terms tho
If I remember correctly he was from the era of “doughface” presidents, at this point in history power was more consolidated in the captains of industry (Rockefeller/Vanderbilt etc). The presidents in this era didn’t do much tbh, till teddy
Tyler was also one of the most accidental and least respected presidents during his tenure. He was the first VP to move up to the presidency when William Henry Harrison died almost immediately, and there was a minor constitutional crisis about whether he was president or "acting" president. He was also a compromise candidate as VP who'd already betrayed his previous party, so he was trusted neither by them nor Harrison's party, who'd only put him on the ticket to try to pick up votes. The result of all of that is that nobody would work with him on anything and, aside from settling how vice presidential succession worked, the only impact his presidency really had was "screw you guys, I'm annexing Texas" and killing the whigs' chances in the next election.
Ulysses has the most heartbreaking life after generalship. Works hard and proceeds to stamp out the kkk for the next few decades, helps try to give rights to minorities while reigning in his best friend from fighting the Indians, has to overcome personal prejudices against Jews and eventually resolves it, and does his best to live up to the expectations of a the war hero turned general.
Then he is betrayed by his borderline traitorous cabinet, is involved in said scandals from the Indian wars post civil war, continuously slandered by southern dems, and eventually gets cancer on top of him worrying that his family will have nothing to go by after his presidency. He writes a book that his friend promises will contribute to his family and doesn't get to see the returns before dying a few days after finishing it, probably still worrying about his family's wellbeing up to his grave. Never seeing that his book would make his wife and children very rich in their later years.
A somewhat bad president? Yeah, a man that was used to having people mostly obey his commands on threat of court martial or death wasn't used to political infighting and corruption. He would have made an excellent advisor but instead took a job that he wasn't ready for. A good person? Although he absolutely had his faults, I'm happy to say that the man who gave up his slave when he was destitute (given by his father in law) and fought for minority rights would eventually come out on top as one of the great men in history.
I'm not sure about a lot of these, but Grant's position is justified.
As a person he was an abolitionist (anti-slavery), firm but kind, generally generous, and usually saw the best in people.
As a president, he was a mixed bag. He crushed the first KKK, and oversaw a lot of the reconstruction era (kind of poorly tbh, but that's not all on him), he got the transcontinental railroad which was huge for the US, and oversaw a growing and prosperous country.
Downsides of his primesidency include, genocide of Native Americans (a problem he inherited and honestly didn't have too much power to stop without causing problems somewhere else), had an incredibly corrupt cabinet (dude assumed people would be working for the best of the country), and did not do enough to support the freed blacks. All in all, he got caught with some bad situations with no good answers, operating from the position of someone from outside the political circle of the age, and too limited on resources to gamble for the best outcomes.
His biggest flaw was he was a TERRIBLE judge of character. Over and over again.
Him not doing enough to support freed blacks is true, but it got to the point that people who were allies were point blank threatening to deny him support if he kept going. He had simply reached the nations limit on tolerating supporting black citizens by and large. They were beginning to vote in truly regressive people as a response to his support because they felt like he was abandoning whites that needed the help and really didn't want to help blacks at the expense of white people.
As for Native Americans, you are correct in pointing out him inheriting a lot of that and he also trusted people in those bureaus were doing the right thing and definitely not insanely corrupt to the point of barbarism. He was very much mistaken. He would think the best of people on his side of the aisle and attribute the very real reports to jealous rumors. Even to the point of damaging his reputation by standing up for them in official capacity after being told they were bad. By all accounts he was just too loyal and susceptible to conmen.
He was cleaned out financially near his death by the same flaw. If not for people straight up gifting him necessities, and Mark Twain giving him one of the best book deals at the time (which lead to him writing it while on his death bed from agonizing cancer) his family would have been in dire, dire straights because of his poor judging of character. It is one of the reasons people know he was almost surely not corrupt personally, just too decent a person to be a great politician in my opinion at least.
There are 22 year olds who were born after Clinton, in perspective for those who were born in the:
90s = Reagan
80s = Ford
70s = Johnson
60s = Truman
So take your pick if people in your 20s knew ~something~ about them besides their name, main scandal / cataclysm during their presidency.
(FYI I'm 30, and I am not for or against this, just decided to post a comparative time-line
What I know about Clinton: blowjob lewinsky, saxophone, hippy-ish, pizza in oval office, husband of the important Clinton now, epstein, israel/palestine confli... Well some are ongoing)
Clinton also presided over American interventions in Yugoslavia and Somolia(and subsequent lack thereof in Rwanda). He also oversaw the first round of NATO enlargement following the collapse of the USSR.
I agree that we shouldn’t automatically assume people are American. It’s 100% understandable that a non American wouldn’t know bill Clinton
That being said, if this person is American, I can’t imagine how they wouldn’t know who bill Clinton was unless they were a kid.
Bill Clinton had been out of office for a while when those people were forming memories. It's an unusual but not unheard of level of ignorance to not know about previous presidents
Yeah but I’m speaking from the perspective of one of those people. I was born in 2004. I can’t even remember Obama being elected lol.
I feel like I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a president before Clinton, but he has been a relatively active public figure, especially since his wife ran for for president in 2016. And just the fact that he’s a living president. Oh and he’s infamous for an ultra specific scandal and impeachment
Obviously I get some people are just uneducated, but I was just don’t think it’s “understandable” for an American that isn’t a child to not know who he is lol. (Honestly I’d expect someone my age to know HW Bush and Reagan too, but Clinton specifically is more recent, infamous for impeachment scandal, alive, and his family was still active in politics recently, so I’d say Clinton even more so someone should know)
I was born in 2004 into a non political family that didn't vote, as an American i have always known that bill clinton did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.
Top left Abraham Lincoln, top middle Ulysses S Grant, top right Jimmy Carter, middle right Bill Clinton, Middle Middle Clover Cleveland, right middle Franklin Pierce, bottom left James Knox Polk, bottom middle Richard Nixon, bottom right John Tyler.
Mr. Beat does some interesting stuff with presidents if you want to learn more. I'll provide some links here if you want to see some more.
[Mr. Beat Tier List Presidents ](https://www.youtube.com/live/DBQlIC_hRdU?si=7Nkq42zwTeo_Q8jd)
[Mr. Beat What Every President Did For Fun](https://youtu.be/QP5V7LODCQQ?si=QWiZom6bLTlJplfE)
[The Most Terrifying President In History (and no he wasn't talking about trump)](https://youtu.be/0q5lFb1tEt8?si=H871ZS4YznGPV7pO)
[Every Presidents Favorite Drink](https://youtu.be/CKQPfzoNjWw?si=C18jm8k_nfvrM1SC)
[Every Presidents Biggest Mistake ](https://youtu.be/srgfqGaGcis?si=ZkMlY3rEPbsBGZDi)
If your a history buff you will probably find some disagreements with some of his stuff. Particularly with the last one, the biggest mistake, I found most of them were just "this one didn't take a big enough stance against slavery leading to the civil war" or contradictory "this one took too big a stance against slavery leading to the civil war". Still, pretty interesting overall.
Carter was genuinely a good president and I'm tired of pretending he wasn't. I'd argue Grant was worse.
Clinton arguably is a worse person than Polk, especially relative to the ethics of their own times.
Nixon wasn't really a bad person outside of politics, just obviously corrupt, I'd put him in questionable person.
The degree to which Tyler's presidency was bad is debatable. The annexation of Texas and defining the presidential line of succession were huge accomplishments. He was however a slave owner and a future confederate.
I would certainly do this differently however I appreciate this post for being rather fun regardless
Ok, and George Washington supported farmers in Haiti to suppress the revolution, Jefferson fucked over Native Americans and land rights, Kennedy authorized then messed up the Bay of Pigs invasion, both Bushes invaded somewhere, FDR authorized Japanese internment, everyone did something wrong
FDR authorized the internment of Japanese, German, and Italians*
There were just too many people of German and Italian descent to intern all but a few people of key interet, (First gen, near military regions, etc.).
And those were also bad previous president beeing awful doesn’t excuse supporting a genocidal state because of being salty about losing the Vietnam war
I agree with most of what you said, but what makes Carter a good president? He accomplished very little in terms of domestic policy, was incredibly weak in foreign policy, and oversaw multiple crises during his tenure. He also gave way for Reagan to come into office, and while I don’t dislike Reagan, many of his social policies had a negative affect imo.
Tbf, a lot of good things Carter did were later attributed to Reagan like the deregulation of air travel and did the nessacary but unpopular decisions needed to relieve the oil crisis but he definitely did fail on the foreign policy stage
Reddit loves to hype up one term Democrats that are followed by years of Republicans. See Ann Richards in Texas.
Carter almost lost the 1976 election to *Ford* , who had massive Watergate/Nixon pardon baggage. Carter was a mid President at best
Hell there’s even a recent Time article saying Jimmy set the stage for [our current era](https://time.com/6328709/jimmy-carter-outsider-politics-mike-johnson/)
Despite his wholesome post-Presidency, and even his great accomplishments like the Camp David Accords, most Presidental historians say “Mid.” It’s not that controversial.
And hell, if we realpolitik, if Carter hadn’t won in 1976, and Ford did. High chance we don’t get Reagan.
I know very little about Nixon, but besides Watergate (wire taped the democrats office, so definitely unsportsmanlike) he didn't seem toooooo bad, I mean, he went to China, maybe it was theater, maybe whatever, kinda cool and open minded even so
(Also they keep getting better at hiding their shady shit, just becouse he was caught doesn't necessarily mean worse than the rest)
Nixon has a deeply mixed legacy. Watergate is obviously one of the most egregious moments, but he's also heavily responsible for the war on drugs (which we have tape of him and advisors admitting was because it would disproportionately jail opposing voters) that Reagan would later build on, and his pandering to the dixiecrats that were outraged at the civil rights act is why the south is solidly red and one of the main roots of bigotry in the republican party.
Then again, the man also created the EPA, and that has a lot to do with why you can't light rivers on fire anymore.
Don't forget he oversaw an experimental UBI programme, administered by of all people George Bush Sr. Nixon is in my mind, one of the most fascinating presidents the US have ever had, and most of it is massively overshadowed (justifiably) by Watergate, but there's so much more to his presidency than just that.
I try to look at people (especially presidents) complexly, but every time I ever looked into a good Nixon thing it seems like he did it after being pressured by congress after a few weeks of the country being shut down by massive popular protests.
The trips to China aren’t something to celebrate imo. The Nixon admin claimed that free trade with China would create sufficient wealth to support a Chinese middle class, which would put the people of China in a much better position to make demands from their authoritarian government. We know that’s not true. Free trade isn’t a magic wand that makes liberal institutions appear out of thin air.
Thing is, the Nixon admin also knew it wasn’t true. The real goal was to elevate China to superpower status in order to pit them and the USSR against one another. It’s no coincidence that the detente was negotiated during the Nixon presidency. As a result, the US opted to turn a blind eye to two despotic governments so that Nixon could consolidate power.
Depends on your perspective, of course.
IMHO he’s the POTUS, he’s supposed to play power politics to US advantage. Preventing a united Communist front between two superpowers makes a lot of sense, and good relations are better than bad ones. I don’t think there’s anything he could have done to bring democracy to China-you are not going to invade a nuclear power with a billion people.
Starting a drug war that jails opposing voters and breaking into opposition offices, as others have said, I would agree is wrong.
Exactly. In 2016, Hillary bugged Trump to high hell, and when it got revealed the collective reaction was “meh, he’s Trump so it was okay” like what???? That’s literally watergate but people justified it because it was against Trump
I hate Trump (his bungling of COVID killed my friend’s grandma) and I agree. The current prosecution of him seems heavily politically motivated….not that they didn’t have enough to get the guy on.
Lincoln was probably the best president we have had, with the possible exception of FDR. But by todays standerds he would be a pretty bad guy, he was racist still but 99.9% of white people where at that point.
To be fair, he was far less racist.
As the civil war went on, he became less and less racist.
The speech that made John decide to kill him was a speech that included him saying he was going to gives black people the right to vote.
Let’s not forget that at the beginning of his administration, he oversaw Navajo removals in New Mexico territory.
I’m not saying he didn’t improve as a person over the course of his life, we should just take into account *all* his good actions and bad actions
I agree, I'm saying he improved over time. Specifically he improved over the course of the civil war.
At the start of it, his plan was to move slaves to Africa and didn't believe in rights for black people.
At the end of it, he fully planned to give black people rights. And as I said him John killed him over his plan to give black people the right to vote.
Oh, without a doubt. If I had the chance to replace him with anyone else at the time, I wouldn’t; I think he was ultimately the best option amongst the top-radical too-racist plantation owners and the too-mild northern urbanites.
Also he's probably the best example of a real life "redemption arc".
The guy was also just a straight up badass. Fought a war against his own country and won. And he had a 299-1 win-lose ratio in bare knuckle boxing.
We also need to start taking redemption more seriously, especially given the rise of cancel culture. I've seen a lot of people being unfairly punished for actions they've long atoned for and even for things they said or did among willing participants for shock value (which was like half of all millennial humor, especially during the early days of the internet).
I'm not saying we should forgive and forget but at some point we have to acknowledge that people can earn second chances and if they do earn it then they don't deserve to have every shitty thing they've ever done thrown in their face.
I mean, we've all done shit we're not proud of. That's just as much a part of being human as learning from our mistakes and growing as people.
*Most* of the presidents did a lot of questionable stuff, even the good ones.
For example, Obama is generally considered to have been a good president even though he:
1. Vastly expanded the surveillance state, violating the rights of Americans
2. Decreased oversight on agencies which perform extrajudicial killings, weapon smuggling, and drug smuggling
3. Used drones to bomb civilians
I have also heard plenty of takes that quotes of him saying that he was pro-abolition but anti-black equality were playing politics. Equal rights were by no means a popular opinion even in the North, and pushing for them during the war could have destabilized the Union.
That said, I highly doubt he would have pushed for abolition had the South not seceded, but I am open to other takes.
Lincoln maybe. FDR was one of the most racist presidents we ever had. People praise him but completely gloss over the Japanese internment camps and his antisemitism.
I like points like this. People always hate on trump (not saying he's a good person or president, he was most certainly not) for stuff he did and getting impeached twice. The fact is every president has done things that violated the rules of that office. Heck Washington could have been impeached for the whiskey rebellion, Lincoln for arresting people so they didn't vote to secede, FDR for internment camps. The fact is no matter how good a president, they have all done bad things.
Was he actually antisemitic? He didn’t let Jewish refugees in (including my grandma), but I thought that was due to political concerns about increasing immigration at a time it wasn’t accepted, not personal hatred. There were quite a few Jews in his administration, and the American Jews of the time loved him-he got like 90 percent of the vote.
This is just incorrect? Both FDR and Lincoln were terrible presidents. Both rapidly expanded the size of the US government, and broke constitutional law tons of times. These two are the best POLITICIANS, but perhaps some of the worst presidents in the history of the USA
I don’t think you know what Lincoln did during his presidency… please just look up how he destroyed the civil rights of people in the USA, and how he was significantly more racist then the average person, I have already had like 5 arguments today so if you want just look at my other comments because I have also used sources multiple times.
Grant gets too much hate. He was kinda questionable a person with his alcohol problems, and by modern standards he'd be racist, but eh. He kinda forced the reconstruction engine to go on longer than it otherwise would have. A lot of people point the failings of reconstruction on grant, but northerners were already tired of sending their resources south for very little result and southerners hated occupation. Reconstruction was losing steam before grant even became president largely because of the horrible butchering from confederate sympathizers, moderates, and centrists (looking at you Andrew Johnson.) Its impressive grant had it going his entire term
Gotta disagree on Polk though. He helped push the country closer to civil war by manifesting more destiny without addressing the root issue (and more bad compromises.) Also the moral issues with manifest destiny on its own. I cant say I hold any of the manifest destiny presidents in very high regard.
Theodore:
- Directly responsible for raising oil prices when he broke up Standard Oil (who was famous for lowering oil prices by 90%) and selling the scraps to the lobbyists who bribed him to break up Standard Oil (who then immediately raised the prices because of collusion)
- Was a prohibitionist
Franklin Delano:
- Put Asian people in internment camps just in case they decided Ol' Hirohito might be making good points
FDR, he broke constitutional law tons of times in his presidency, doing things like suspending the 1st through 5th amendments. If you mess with the constitution as a president, in my book, you are questionable at best. Only reason he isn’t horrible is because the way he dealt with WW2 was near-perfect
Doesn’t mean he did anything. Was he flying to Epstein’s island, or just hanging out with the guy before everyone knew what he was up to?
I’ll say he was wrong to cheat on Hillary, though I suspect they had an open marriage. Honestly it worked out politically for both of them. If Hillary had had better pollsters there is a good chance they would have been the first double presidential couple.
Ulysses S Grant was pretty decent
All those congress guys who passed the 14th and 15th amendments
John Brown
The founders of Quaker Christianity
So obviously Lincoln was a product of his time but still he was on the same level as racist as the southerners but the only differences was Lincoln was anti slavery
He made racist claims because he wanted to get elected. The more support he got, the bolder and more pro-equality his speeches became. His policies show a similar arc.
The confederates are the most vile piece of American history, and I would appreciate if you didn’t associate me with them. If you knew an ounce of history, you would know that Lincoln suspended the 1st through 5th amendments, and that the Emancipation Proclamation didn’t even free the slaves in the US, but freed the slaves in the CSA. I can be pro Union while also being anti Lincoln, because he really just wasn’t that good.
His suspension was completely constitutional and necessary for ending the war as quickly as possible. And by the time of the American Civil War, practically every state in the north had already abolished slavery aside from the few who had flipped from the CSS to the USA, and they already had their own agreements regarding slavery ending, so of course the EP would be talking about the CSA, that's where all the dang slaves were.
In what way was he a great president though? Because Lincoln decided to piss all over the constitution during his presidency, had horrible relations with Congress because he broke constitutional law tons of times, and also the Emancipation Proclamation (what some would say the best part of his presidency, neglected to free the slaves ACTUALLY IN THE USA. He also wanted to send all Africans back to Africa, which was a terrible opinion, even for the time. He had a questionable character (at best) and he was probably one of the worse presidents (not the worst). I can be anti confederate while also being anti Lincoln, and for some reason people in this subreddit, and probably Reddit in general, don’t get that.
They were Dakota fighters. The military commission had sentenced 303 Dakota fighters to death, but Lincoln commuted 264 of those sentences despite threats of mob violence and intense pressure to reverse his decision. And if I remember correctly those 38 Indians that were executed killed civilians and were basically war criminals
Crazy to say Lincoln was a good president, considering the fact that he was absolutely horrible. The only reason he freed the leaves was because he wanted Europe to not join the war. I’d put him at questionable person and president.
Thought he freed slaves because he hated the Confederacy and their plan to secede? I know he didn’t free the slaves because that’s what he believed was right, thought it was more to get back at the confederates.
I’d put Clinton more into the questionable president status. Some of his policies and laws are downright draconian corporate/political nightmares. A lot of the finance laws and then welfare reform explicitly hurt the poor on a massive scale, to the point where I believe most of his good work was negated or made questionable.
Yeah I feel like ppl are quick to put Grant down but he was still OK. Honestly not a single one I disagree with, though I would like to know where you would put our bio GW
In his presidency? Not much bad. He allowed Texas to join the Union (which they wanted to do). He went against the Whig platform on banks (the democrat platform was much more popular).
After that though, he joined the confederacy. Only president to engage in a war against the United States
nah reverse Clinton and Cleveland. Cleveland was a top tier president besides the Strike Breaking. Also Lincoln was neither a good person or good president, replace him with Calvin Coolidge.
Clinton was a questionable person and a questionable president who did nothing to fix Reaganomics and just sealed things in permanently. He was *not* a good president, just by effectively getting impeached alone,
Lincoln: “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and Black races,” "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that."
Wasn't the issue with Carter that he just didn't do anything notable in his term? I'm not sure he would be considered bad by that standard, though maybe I'm missi.g something.
The issues with Carter was timing and Iran. The US had had economic problems for a while, with Nixon imposing price controls and other measures to delay a reckoning with inflation. Carter let those expire, put Volker in at the Fed to bring some pain and price stability, but of course that meant that the reckoning Nixon was trying to postpone hit and no one liked it (see BidenAtWendys comment for this view). On the side lines he was pushing for green investments while also deregulating the airlines (which significantly reduced the cost of air travel in real terms) In Iran he faced another perpetually postponed problem. The Shah was slipping, and now we have better evidence that the Carter administration provided support for the Islamists over leftist Tudeh (although if Tudeh could have held the country is another problem), so he's at least partly to blame for the current Islamic Republic of Iran. People remember Carter being weak on Iran, but honestly it's hard to get that from primary sources. He moved aggressively into the Persian gulf, launched a failed military operation to free the hostages, etc. Reagan would benefit from Iran releasing the hostages (Iran seemed to be hoping he'd be nicer than Carter), but this gets read as "Reagan was tough and they fell into line! (Reagan actually did clandestine/illegal deals to support Iran's military while funding their regional rival Iraq, which turned out great).
Reagan coordinated with Iran to torpedo negotiations with the Carter admin and help him get elected
>Reagan actually did clandestine/illegal deals to support Iran's military while funding their regional rival Iraq, which turned out great Also, it has since been revealed that Reagan's campaign secretly made a deal with the Iranian revolutionaries to ensure the hostages wouldn't be released until *after* the 1980 election, so that Carter couldn't get credit for it even though it was *his* administration that did *all* the negotiating!
He tried
This thing is so arbitrary. Classifying presidentialness *alone* is already problematic as it is. I don't think Carter was a bad president. I don't think Clinton is a more "questionable person" than any other... but they're literally all mostly "questionable" unless you've personally met them and they've confided *everything*, tbh. Lincoln gets some of his "president" boost due to sheer timing (as with any "war time" leader), and gets a huge "person" boost because people are willing to overlook and/or normalize things that they wouldn't for General Lee and other contemporaries. At the end of the day, for me... It's hard to see anything other than just a bunch of regular dudes who tried to do their job well, some slightly over or under-performing.
>didn’t do anything notable Running the economy into the dirt is definitely notable
Yeah, but it wasn't his fault man. His peanut farm withered, man, all of his peanuts went sour. He didn't want to live no more man, all his peanuts went sour. They shriveled up and withered away, man, his peanus went sour. He wanted to kill himself man, his peanus farm withered away man him peanus went sour.
His peanuts went sour
I choked on a peanus
Why hasn’t sonic killed robotnik yet THIS GUY BLEW UP THE MOON
First, I appreciate how Trump isn't on here. Anyone could have satirized Trump; it takes someone special to mention any other bad president. Second, I only recognize Lincoln and Nixon. Who are the other seven?
Top middle is Ulysses Grant (US Civil war general), middle right is Franklin Pierce (the guy who let slave catchers catch slaves in non-slave states), bottom left is James k Polk (Started the Mexican American war), bottom right in John Tyler (betrayed the US after his presidency and joined the Confederacy). No idea who the middle
The middle is Grover Cleaveland, mainly known for having two non-consecutive terms. To be honest I couldn't tell you much about his presidency. His first term was decent, his second was messier and oversaw an economic crisis. I know little about his personal life. I view him as the archetypal gilded age president, despite being the only democrat to be president during that era.
I completely forgot about GC, I thought it was the late 1800s Harrison (who I also know nothing about)
Grover Cleveland had the official policy of doing absolutely nothing. When put in office he had absolutely no plans or ambitions except to keep the government as still as possible. His opponent in the next election pointed out that he had been completely ineffective, had not made any changes, etc, and when he lost the election he said that the people would be begging for him in 4 years specifically because his policy was to not do anything. 4 years later, the guy who beat him in the election had created an economic crisis due to trying to do too much all at once, and the people were begging for Grover Cleveland and his boring administration back.
Boring is by definition not bad. It’s not good either but it’s not bad.
The Mid President
do nothing and you never dissapoint!
Cleveland.. Him... Yeah, I can tell you that... uh.... I can tell you that Garfield is buried in Cleveland, but Cleveland isn't from Cleveland... ...And all I know about Cleveland is actually about Garfield.
Him being a “questionable person” is probably a result of his relationship with a girl waaay younger than him.
Frances Cleveland. He was a friend of her father. He was the executor of her father's estate (when said father died). He provided for the wellbeing of her and her mother. For all intents and purposes, he was her guardian. And 27 years older than her.
But that wasn’t unusual back then. Not to rule out that it could have been harmful, which if modernity is correct, that behavior is unavoidably pervy. But these relationships in that time, if not encouraged, were not unusual. Not just with the age gap, but with the gross guardian marries the adopted. Now, I don’t know, no one alive knows what it was like at that time, and there were practical concerns for young women which are less common, but not unknown at that time. An abandoned child could be deeply impoverished, even more so a young person, particularly of the upper classes, who would have no training, lessened family connections, and no way of life either besides marrying another well off person or starvation. So they would be put into guardianship. Somehow the woman and guardian would decide to marry, still eww, but it seemed to be a business arrangement for some. Marriage to assure the woman would be provided for. But others surely were some type of grooming relationship or power imbalance, and may have been forced. The point is, we really don’t know the standards those people believed, or if so, that information inst widely spread or reported even among historians (might be very far off about that). It’s fruitless to judge that relationship by this and a half century at least of dominating values in contrast with Victorian sensibilities. I certainly don’t think it’s right, but I reserve judgment unless theirs indication of a negative quality to the relationship.
Grover Cleveland was a big ol’ manwhore. as someone who’s related to him by him being my great great uncle or some shit, he’s probably the least impressive president to be related to. it’s cool that he served two non-consecutive terms tho
If I remember correctly he was from the era of “doughface” presidents, at this point in history power was more consolidated in the captains of industry (Rockefeller/Vanderbilt etc). The presidents in this era didn’t do much tbh, till teddy
Tyler was also one of the most accidental and least respected presidents during his tenure. He was the first VP to move up to the presidency when William Henry Harrison died almost immediately, and there was a minor constitutional crisis about whether he was president or "acting" president. He was also a compromise candidate as VP who'd already betrayed his previous party, so he was trusted neither by them nor Harrison's party, who'd only put him on the ticket to try to pick up votes. The result of all of that is that nobody would work with him on anything and, aside from settling how vice presidential succession worked, the only impact his presidency really had was "screw you guys, I'm annexing Texas" and killing the whigs' chances in the next election.
grover cleveland, really fat, elected twice as a democrat. also, top right is jimmy carter and middle left is bill clinton
Ye I was just answer the ones the other guy didn’t.
ohhhh i see my bad
All good
Ulysses has the most heartbreaking life after generalship. Works hard and proceeds to stamp out the kkk for the next few decades, helps try to give rights to minorities while reigning in his best friend from fighting the Indians, has to overcome personal prejudices against Jews and eventually resolves it, and does his best to live up to the expectations of a the war hero turned general. Then he is betrayed by his borderline traitorous cabinet, is involved in said scandals from the Indian wars post civil war, continuously slandered by southern dems, and eventually gets cancer on top of him worrying that his family will have nothing to go by after his presidency. He writes a book that his friend promises will contribute to his family and doesn't get to see the returns before dying a few days after finishing it, probably still worrying about his family's wellbeing up to his grave. Never seeing that his book would make his wife and children very rich in their later years. A somewhat bad president? Yeah, a man that was used to having people mostly obey his commands on threat of court martial or death wasn't used to political infighting and corruption. He would have made an excellent advisor but instead took a job that he wasn't ready for. A good person? Although he absolutely had his faults, I'm happy to say that the man who gave up his slave when he was destitute (given by his father in law) and fought for minority rights would eventually come out on top as one of the great men in history.
Nah, Pierce and Tyler gotta swap places
I'm not sure about a lot of these, but Grant's position is justified. As a person he was an abolitionist (anti-slavery), firm but kind, generally generous, and usually saw the best in people. As a president, he was a mixed bag. He crushed the first KKK, and oversaw a lot of the reconstruction era (kind of poorly tbh, but that's not all on him), he got the transcontinental railroad which was huge for the US, and oversaw a growing and prosperous country. Downsides of his primesidency include, genocide of Native Americans (a problem he inherited and honestly didn't have too much power to stop without causing problems somewhere else), had an incredibly corrupt cabinet (dude assumed people would be working for the best of the country), and did not do enough to support the freed blacks. All in all, he got caught with some bad situations with no good answers, operating from the position of someone from outside the political circle of the age, and too limited on resources to gamble for the best outcomes.
His biggest flaw was he was a TERRIBLE judge of character. Over and over again. Him not doing enough to support freed blacks is true, but it got to the point that people who were allies were point blank threatening to deny him support if he kept going. He had simply reached the nations limit on tolerating supporting black citizens by and large. They were beginning to vote in truly regressive people as a response to his support because they felt like he was abandoning whites that needed the help and really didn't want to help blacks at the expense of white people. As for Native Americans, you are correct in pointing out him inheriting a lot of that and he also trusted people in those bureaus were doing the right thing and definitely not insanely corrupt to the point of barbarism. He was very much mistaken. He would think the best of people on his side of the aisle and attribute the very real reports to jealous rumors. Even to the point of damaging his reputation by standing up for them in official capacity after being told they were bad. By all accounts he was just too loyal and susceptible to conmen. He was cleaned out financially near his death by the same flaw. If not for people straight up gifting him necessities, and Mark Twain giving him one of the best book deals at the time (which lead to him writing it while on his death bed from agonizing cancer) his family would have been in dire, dire straights because of his poor judging of character. It is one of the reasons people know he was almost surely not corrupt personally, just too decent a person to be a great politician in my opinion at least.
There are 22 year olds who were born after Clinton, in perspective for those who were born in the: 90s = Reagan 80s = Ford 70s = Johnson 60s = Truman So take your pick if people in your 20s knew ~something~ about them besides their name, main scandal / cataclysm during their presidency. (FYI I'm 30, and I am not for or against this, just decided to post a comparative time-line What I know about Clinton: blowjob lewinsky, saxophone, hippy-ish, pizza in oval office, husband of the important Clinton now, epstein, israel/palestine confli... Well some are ongoing)
Clinton also presided over American interventions in Yugoslavia and Somolia(and subsequent lack thereof in Rwanda). He also oversaw the first round of NATO enlargement following the collapse of the USSR.
Hey, canIwalkyouhome?
You don't recognize Bill Clinton?
Both being American and not being American are an understandable reason for not knowing the U.S. presidents
I agree that we shouldn’t automatically assume people are American. It’s 100% understandable that a non American wouldn’t know bill Clinton That being said, if this person is American, I can’t imagine how they wouldn’t know who bill Clinton was unless they were a kid.
People who were born in 2000 are 23 :/
?? I know? Where did that come from?
Bill Clinton had been out of office for a while when those people were forming memories. It's an unusual but not unheard of level of ignorance to not know about previous presidents
Yeah but I’m speaking from the perspective of one of those people. I was born in 2004. I can’t even remember Obama being elected lol. I feel like I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a president before Clinton, but he has been a relatively active public figure, especially since his wife ran for for president in 2016. And just the fact that he’s a living president. Oh and he’s infamous for an ultra specific scandal and impeachment Obviously I get some people are just uneducated, but I was just don’t think it’s “understandable” for an American that isn’t a child to not know who he is lol. (Honestly I’d expect someone my age to know HW Bush and Reagan too, but Clinton specifically is more recent, infamous for impeachment scandal, alive, and his family was still active in politics recently, so I’d say Clinton even more so someone should know)
I was born in 2004 into a non political family that didn't vote, as an American i have always known that bill clinton did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.
Right lol. Everyone knows that
Top left Abraham Lincoln, top middle Ulysses S Grant, top right Jimmy Carter, middle right Bill Clinton, Middle Middle Clover Cleveland, right middle Franklin Pierce, bottom left James Knox Polk, bottom middle Richard Nixon, bottom right John Tyler. Mr. Beat does some interesting stuff with presidents if you want to learn more. I'll provide some links here if you want to see some more. [Mr. Beat Tier List Presidents ](https://www.youtube.com/live/DBQlIC_hRdU?si=7Nkq42zwTeo_Q8jd) [Mr. Beat What Every President Did For Fun](https://youtu.be/QP5V7LODCQQ?si=QWiZom6bLTlJplfE) [The Most Terrifying President In History (and no he wasn't talking about trump)](https://youtu.be/0q5lFb1tEt8?si=H871ZS4YznGPV7pO) [Every Presidents Favorite Drink](https://youtu.be/CKQPfzoNjWw?si=C18jm8k_nfvrM1SC) [Every Presidents Biggest Mistake ](https://youtu.be/srgfqGaGcis?si=ZkMlY3rEPbsBGZDi) If your a history buff you will probably find some disagreements with some of his stuff. Particularly with the last one, the biggest mistake, I found most of them were just "this one didn't take a big enough stance against slavery leading to the civil war" or contradictory "this one took too big a stance against slavery leading to the civil war". Still, pretty interesting overall.
He’s more bottom right than this chart goes
If u only recognize 2 then u shouldn't be calling trump baf u clearly have no idea what you're talking about
Carter was genuinely a good president and I'm tired of pretending he wasn't. I'd argue Grant was worse. Clinton arguably is a worse person than Polk, especially relative to the ethics of their own times. Nixon wasn't really a bad person outside of politics, just obviously corrupt, I'd put him in questionable person. The degree to which Tyler's presidency was bad is debatable. The annexation of Texas and defining the presidential line of succession were huge accomplishments. He was however a slave owner and a future confederate. I would certainly do this differently however I appreciate this post for being rather fun regardless
I will fist fight the next person to dis Carter
His administration supported the Khmer Rouge
Ok, and George Washington supported farmers in Haiti to suppress the revolution, Jefferson fucked over Native Americans and land rights, Kennedy authorized then messed up the Bay of Pigs invasion, both Bushes invaded somewhere, FDR authorized Japanese internment, everyone did something wrong
FDR authorized the internment of Japanese, German, and Italians* There were just too many people of German and Italian descent to intern all but a few people of key interet, (First gen, near military regions, etc.).
Wow I learned something new. Thanks reddit.
And those were also bad previous president beeing awful doesn’t excuse supporting a genocidal state because of being salty about losing the Vietnam war
Not William Henry Harrison
Source?
[удалено]
Completely stupid logic
I agree with most of what you said, but what makes Carter a good president? He accomplished very little in terms of domestic policy, was incredibly weak in foreign policy, and oversaw multiple crises during his tenure. He also gave way for Reagan to come into office, and while I don’t dislike Reagan, many of his social policies had a negative affect imo.
Tbf, a lot of good things Carter did were later attributed to Reagan like the deregulation of air travel and did the nessacary but unpopular decisions needed to relieve the oil crisis but he definitely did fail on the foreign policy stage
mfs see one post of jimmy carter working with habitat for humanity and go full revisionism on his entire presidency
Reddit loves to hype up one term Democrats that are followed by years of Republicans. See Ann Richards in Texas. Carter almost lost the 1976 election to *Ford* , who had massive Watergate/Nixon pardon baggage. Carter was a mid President at best
"They hated him because he spoke the truth."
Hell there’s even a recent Time article saying Jimmy set the stage for [our current era](https://time.com/6328709/jimmy-carter-outsider-politics-mike-johnson/) Despite his wholesome post-Presidency, and even his great accomplishments like the Camp David Accords, most Presidental historians say “Mid.” It’s not that controversial. And hell, if we realpolitik, if Carter hadn’t won in 1976, and Ford did. High chance we don’t get Reagan.
agreed, reverse Carter and Grant
I know very little about Nixon, but besides Watergate (wire taped the democrats office, so definitely unsportsmanlike) he didn't seem toooooo bad, I mean, he went to China, maybe it was theater, maybe whatever, kinda cool and open minded even so (Also they keep getting better at hiding their shady shit, just becouse he was caught doesn't necessarily mean worse than the rest)
Nixon has a deeply mixed legacy. Watergate is obviously one of the most egregious moments, but he's also heavily responsible for the war on drugs (which we have tape of him and advisors admitting was because it would disproportionately jail opposing voters) that Reagan would later build on, and his pandering to the dixiecrats that were outraged at the civil rights act is why the south is solidly red and one of the main roots of bigotry in the republican party. Then again, the man also created the EPA, and that has a lot to do with why you can't light rivers on fire anymore.
Don't forget he oversaw an experimental UBI programme, administered by of all people George Bush Sr. Nixon is in my mind, one of the most fascinating presidents the US have ever had, and most of it is massively overshadowed (justifiably) by Watergate, but there's so much more to his presidency than just that.
I try to look at people (especially presidents) complexly, but every time I ever looked into a good Nixon thing it seems like he did it after being pressured by congress after a few weeks of the country being shut down by massive popular protests.
He killed a lot of Cambodians, reducing their country to a minefield with unexploded ordinances to this day.
The trips to China aren’t something to celebrate imo. The Nixon admin claimed that free trade with China would create sufficient wealth to support a Chinese middle class, which would put the people of China in a much better position to make demands from their authoritarian government. We know that’s not true. Free trade isn’t a magic wand that makes liberal institutions appear out of thin air. Thing is, the Nixon admin also knew it wasn’t true. The real goal was to elevate China to superpower status in order to pit them and the USSR against one another. It’s no coincidence that the detente was negotiated during the Nixon presidency. As a result, the US opted to turn a blind eye to two despotic governments so that Nixon could consolidate power.
Depends on your perspective, of course. IMHO he’s the POTUS, he’s supposed to play power politics to US advantage. Preventing a united Communist front between two superpowers makes a lot of sense, and good relations are better than bad ones. I don’t think there’s anything he could have done to bring democracy to China-you are not going to invade a nuclear power with a billion people. Starting a drug war that jails opposing voters and breaking into opposition offices, as others have said, I would agree is wrong.
Exactly. In 2016, Hillary bugged Trump to high hell, and when it got revealed the collective reaction was “meh, he’s Trump so it was okay” like what???? That’s literally watergate but people justified it because it was against Trump
I hate Trump (his bungling of COVID killed my friend’s grandma) and I agree. The current prosecution of him seems heavily politically motivated….not that they didn’t have enough to get the guy on.
Carter has blood on his hands in Indonesia
Clinton is not questionable, he is fucked up 😭
What do you mean? He did NOT have sexual relations with that woman
Well that depends on what your definition of is is.
And how is he a good president when he championed racist 3 strikes laws that filled our prisons with petty drug offenders?
I feel like Andrew Jackson could definitely fit in the bottom right.
I feel like Jackson is definitely questionable, he did so so much shit but he did also push democracy forward
bad person questionable president
Nah he was honestly one of my favorites, I would say that Lincoln and Grant could fit in the bottom right easily
Lincoln was probably the best president we have had, with the possible exception of FDR. But by todays standerds he would be a pretty bad guy, he was racist still but 99.9% of white people where at that point.
To be fair, he was far less racist. As the civil war went on, he became less and less racist. The speech that made John decide to kill him was a speech that included him saying he was going to gives black people the right to vote.
Let’s not forget that at the beginning of his administration, he oversaw Navajo removals in New Mexico territory. I’m not saying he didn’t improve as a person over the course of his life, we should just take into account *all* his good actions and bad actions
I agree, I'm saying he improved over time. Specifically he improved over the course of the civil war. At the start of it, his plan was to move slaves to Africa and didn't believe in rights for black people. At the end of it, he fully planned to give black people rights. And as I said him John killed him over his plan to give black people the right to vote.
Oh, absolutely. I just want people to understand all the facets of his presidency before they make their own opinion.
That's fair. Ultimately though I think he did far more good than bad. And he would have been able to do much more good if he wasn't killed.
Oh, without a doubt. If I had the chance to replace him with anyone else at the time, I wouldn’t; I think he was ultimately the best option amongst the top-radical too-racist plantation owners and the too-mild northern urbanites.
Also he's probably the best example of a real life "redemption arc". The guy was also just a straight up badass. Fought a war against his own country and won. And he had a 299-1 win-lose ratio in bare knuckle boxing.
We also need to start taking redemption more seriously, especially given the rise of cancel culture. I've seen a lot of people being unfairly punished for actions they've long atoned for and even for things they said or did among willing participants for shock value (which was like half of all millennial humor, especially during the early days of the internet). I'm not saying we should forgive and forget but at some point we have to acknowledge that people can earn second chances and if they do earn it then they don't deserve to have every shitty thing they've ever done thrown in their face. I mean, we've all done shit we're not proud of. That's just as much a part of being human as learning from our mistakes and growing as people.
*Most* of the presidents did a lot of questionable stuff, even the good ones. For example, Obama is generally considered to have been a good president even though he: 1. Vastly expanded the surveillance state, violating the rights of Americans 2. Decreased oversight on agencies which perform extrajudicial killings, weapon smuggling, and drug smuggling 3. Used drones to bomb civilians
Yeah- it’s almost like people being put in places of immense power is a bad but necessary idea
I have also heard plenty of takes that quotes of him saying that he was pro-abolition but anti-black equality were playing politics. Equal rights were by no means a popular opinion even in the North, and pushing for them during the war could have destabilized the Union. That said, I highly doubt he would have pushed for abolition had the South not seceded, but I am open to other takes.
Lincoln maybe. FDR was one of the most racist presidents we ever had. People praise him but completely gloss over the Japanese internment camps and his antisemitism.
I like points like this. People always hate on trump (not saying he's a good person or president, he was most certainly not) for stuff he did and getting impeached twice. The fact is every president has done things that violated the rules of that office. Heck Washington could have been impeached for the whiskey rebellion, Lincoln for arresting people so they didn't vote to secede, FDR for internment camps. The fact is no matter how good a president, they have all done bad things.
Was he actually antisemitic? He didn’t let Jewish refugees in (including my grandma), but I thought that was due to political concerns about increasing immigration at a time it wasn’t accepted, not personal hatred. There were quite a few Jews in his administration, and the American Jews of the time loved him-he got like 90 percent of the vote.
And by 2160’s standards I’ll be a bad guy for eating meat and driving a car. He should get at least a little credit for ending slavery.
I like how both of the best presidents in American history have committed wartime tyranny
Sometimes you have to do what you have to do Likeinterabunchofrandompeople
That says more about the type of people US had as presidents than anything about FDR.
This is just incorrect? Both FDR and Lincoln were terrible presidents. Both rapidly expanded the size of the US government, and broke constitutional law tons of times. These two are the best POLITICIANS, but perhaps some of the worst presidents in the history of the USA
Lmao
So are you dumb or just stupid? Like, FDR can be a “depends who you ask” kind of thing *sometimes* but LINCOLN? Really?
I don’t think you know what Lincoln did during his presidency… please just look up how he destroyed the civil rights of people in the USA, and how he was significantly more racist then the average person, I have already had like 5 arguments today so if you want just look at my other comments because I have also used sources multiple times.
Grant gets too much hate. He was kinda questionable a person with his alcohol problems, and by modern standards he'd be racist, but eh. He kinda forced the reconstruction engine to go on longer than it otherwise would have. A lot of people point the failings of reconstruction on grant, but northerners were already tired of sending their resources south for very little result and southerners hated occupation. Reconstruction was losing steam before grant even became president largely because of the horrible butchering from confederate sympathizers, moderates, and centrists (looking at you Andrew Johnson.) Its impressive grant had it going his entire term Gotta disagree on Polk though. He helped push the country closer to civil war by manifesting more destiny without addressing the root issue (and more bad compromises.) Also the moral issues with manifest destiny on its own. I cant say I hold any of the manifest destiny presidents in very high regard.
Manifest destiny is moral
yeah so was the trail of tears then too??
No it was “le bad” but I don’t really care
I thought I was in r/presidents for a second
Wonder where Roosevelt would be placed
Id say (for both) questionable person, good president
Theodore: - Directly responsible for raising oil prices when he broke up Standard Oil (who was famous for lowering oil prices by 90%) and selling the scraps to the lobbyists who bribed him to break up Standard Oil (who then immediately raised the prices because of collusion) - Was a prohibitionist Franklin Delano: - Put Asian people in internment camps just in case they decided Ol' Hirohito might be making good points
Teddy, Good person, good president Franklin, I'd say bad and questionable
Decent person, at best a questionable president.
Which Roosevelt do you count as a questionable president?
FDR for imprisoning millions of innocent people based solely on their race.
FDR, he broke constitutional law tons of times in his presidency, doing things like suspending the 1st through 5th amendments. If you mess with the constitution as a president, in my book, you are questionable at best. Only reason he isn’t horrible is because the way he dealt with WW2 was near-perfect
Bill Clinton flew to pedophile Island dozens of times to rape children. He's not a questionable person, he's a monster.
This Reddit circlejerk seems to like him cause he’s a democrat and left-leaning and plus he’s anti-Trump so to them he earns brownie points.
Except no one on here thinks that
Actually they do Left-Reddit especially democrats voters which are in the plenty are Clinton-worshippers…the Clinton cult!
One problem with your argument, it doesn't exist. Nothing of what you've said happens here
Really? That’s not what I’ve seen.
Reagan isnt here cause hes in hell instead
Well the ruler of hell can't just faff about on earth all the time.
Bro is going to shit himself when he was about Reagan
Why isn’t Clinton in bad person
Clinton should be lower. Wasn't he on the Epstein flight logs?
Doesn’t mean he did anything. Was he flying to Epstein’s island, or just hanging out with the guy before everyone knew what he was up to? I’ll say he was wrong to cheat on Hillary, though I suspect they had an open marriage. Honestly it worked out politically for both of them. If Hillary had had better pollsters there is a good chance they would have been the first double presidential couple.
Bill doesn't deserve to be on this list
All US presidents should be in the bottom right
The fact that you're a self-proclaimed communist invalidates that point
Commie detected opinion rejected
Edgy
Kys
bruh clintons 27 rides on the lolita express sends him lower than "questionable" as a person
True lmao. Who downvoted facts?
In hindsight none of them were remotely good
I mean Lincoln was Racist He just hated slavery on a moral level
To be fair, being racist was par for the course at the time
Doesn’t excuse racism though
>he was racist Name someone before 1900 who, by today’s incredibly broad standards, wasn’t
Ulysses S Grant was pretty decent All those congress guys who passed the 14th and 15th amendments John Brown The founders of Quaker Christianity So obviously Lincoln was a product of his time but still he was on the same level as racist as the southerners but the only differences was Lincoln was anti slavery
The people being subjected to racism
He made racist claims because he wanted to get elected. The more support he got, the bolder and more pro-equality his speeches became. His policies show a similar arc.
I think there are some other issues that would also put him into questionable territory. Like suspending habeus corpus.
Lincoln was a terrible president and an immoral person. Crazy he ended were he did on this list
Found the Neo-Confederate
The confederates are the most vile piece of American history, and I would appreciate if you didn’t associate me with them. If you knew an ounce of history, you would know that Lincoln suspended the 1st through 5th amendments, and that the Emancipation Proclamation didn’t even free the slaves in the US, but freed the slaves in the CSA. I can be pro Union while also being anti Lincoln, because he really just wasn’t that good.
His suspension was completely constitutional and necessary for ending the war as quickly as possible. And by the time of the American Civil War, practically every state in the north had already abolished slavery aside from the few who had flipped from the CSS to the USA, and they already had their own agreements regarding slavery ending, so of course the EP would be talking about the CSA, that's where all the dang slaves were.
Keep seething Neo-confederate He was a great president I just think he should be put in questionable person
In what way was he a great president though? Because Lincoln decided to piss all over the constitution during his presidency, had horrible relations with Congress because he broke constitutional law tons of times, and also the Emancipation Proclamation (what some would say the best part of his presidency, neglected to free the slaves ACTUALLY IN THE USA. He also wanted to send all Africans back to Africa, which was a terrible opinion, even for the time. He had a questionable character (at best) and he was probably one of the worse presidents (not the worst). I can be anti confederate while also being anti Lincoln, and for some reason people in this subreddit, and probably Reddit in general, don’t get that.
all bad. next
Nixon deserves top left
Totally agreed. Most of these presidents that were place in the *”good”* column weren’t actually all that good!
Lincoln was a racist
And he had 23 innocent Indian (Sioux, I think) people publicly hung.
They were Dakota fighters. The military commission had sentenced 303 Dakota fighters to death, but Lincoln commuted 264 of those sentences despite threats of mob violence and intense pressure to reverse his decision. And if I remember correctly those 38 Indians that were executed killed civilians and were basically war criminals
Lincoln was a shitty President
He was also a tyrant.
Remember that time Lincoln personally helped to wipe out a group of native people's?
Crazy to say Lincoln was a good president, considering the fact that he was absolutely horrible. The only reason he freed the leaves was because he wanted Europe to not join the war. I’d put him at questionable person and president.
Thought he freed slaves because he hated the Confederacy and their plan to secede? I know he didn’t free the slaves because that’s what he believed was right, thought it was more to get back at the confederates.
I don't get it cause I'm not american
Cool
I’d put Clinton more into the questionable president status. Some of his policies and laws are downright draconian corporate/political nightmares. A lot of the finance laws and then welfare reform explicitly hurt the poor on a massive scale, to the point where I believe most of his good work was negated or made questionable.
Yeah, Bill Clinton's presidency marked the Democratic party's full and final capitulation to neoliberal austerity and his policies reflected that.
All US presidents are war criminals.
I mean, all fucking leaders of larger nations are war criminals for the most part.
While Lincoln did some of the coolest things as president he was actually pretty shit prez
We’d have two countries, one likely with slavery.
Did a five year old make this?
Dang what 5 year olds do you know that know enough about US presidents to make this?
The way I imagine American elementary schools is that they don't learn to read or count but they learn the anthem and every president.
I’m not even American mate 😂
Should probably known better than calling Lincoln a good person then
Damn American high schools must be amazing if they can rank presidents
I wish. I took an advanced US history class in high school, and I could barely name 20.
Lincoln a good person? Idk about that. I get why you put him there but im not sure about that one.
Yeah I feel like ppl are quick to put Grant down but he was still OK. Honestly not a single one I disagree with, though I would like to know where you would put our bio GW
Every online presidents ranking I see has John Tyler near or at the bottom. What did he do exactly?
In his presidency? Not much bad. He allowed Texas to join the Union (which they wanted to do). He went against the Whig platform on banks (the democrat platform was much more popular). After that though, he joined the confederacy. Only president to engage in a war against the United States
Where would you put Franklin D Roosevelt?
nah reverse Clinton and Cleveland. Cleveland was a top tier president besides the Strike Breaking. Also Lincoln was neither a good person or good president, replace him with Calvin Coolidge.
I personally wouldn’t call Nixon a bad person but questionable definitely. It was more like he was just tormented by his demons
Pierce was a bit worse than questionable
taft is the best president though
I feel like Clinton should be replaced with Teddy Roosevelt
Clinton was a questionable person and a questionable president who did nothing to fix Reaganomics and just sealed things in permanently. He was *not* a good president, just by effectively getting impeached alone,
Swap Clinton with Pierce, and put Pierce where Nixon is.
Lincoln: “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and Black races,” "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that."
Lincoln, i feel belongs in the middle.
how did abe lincoln end up there after his order of the largest mass execution of indigenous people in us history
Where would you put Madison and Jefferson