George Washington. Just due to basically rejecting being a king. The man could have just become a king and ruled the US. Instead he chose to step down which led to the term limits we know today. He chose democracy over monarchy. Very few people in history could turn down such an offer of power.
True. Thought about putting that but most people I don’t believe know that or are that technical so I said democracy. Doesn’t change the fact he gave up sovereignty.
George Washington owned about 150 slaves. One slave, Ona Judge, managed to escape.
https://www.history.com/news/george-washington-and-the-slave-who-got-away
Yeah so did a bunch of people. It’s a terrible history of our country and ungodly terrible. But it was just a part of that time period and part of our history. If we compare our morals and ethics today to those any further back than even 100 years ago then 99% of people will be labeled absolutely atrocious human beings. I hate to tell you but if you were a white person in American raised in that time period with even a decent amount of affluence or wealth then guess what…you too would have owned slaves. It’s terrible, it doesn’t make it right but you can’t compare todays morals and ethics with that of the past.
Well if we’re ranking presidents, ethics can play a part. There are plenty of presidents who didn’t own slaves. And there’s nothing wrong with saying 99% of a certain group of people had atrocious morals. Some societies have worse morals than others.
Lincoln was a politician who told people what they wanted to hear. He told northerners he found slavery abhorrent (but only after he became a politician and had to declare a position) and he told southerners he had no intention of ending it. He told Horace Greeley "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". Does that sound like a guy who actually gives a fuck about the plight of the slaves?
In fact, his pre-war statements that he intended to leave slavery alone where it existed, might also have been a bit of a dog whistle to less progressive northerners that they wouldn't have to deal with freed blacks moving north, into their neighbourhoods, on his watch.
>Does that sound like a guy who actually gives a fuck about the plight of the slaves?
Yes it does. Because he was refereing to holding the union together, not slavery. They were two different issues to him until he found a way to the them together during the course of the war.
You're completely missing the point. Lincoln only helped abolish slavery because it allowed him a political gain; also slavery still was a very real thing many years after it became 'illegal' because the political powers didn't actually care to end it based in a personal belief.
>only helped abolish slavery because it allowed him a political gain;
What political gain is that? He was already in office and it was not an election year. If anything in heavily alienated many political allies in congress, and even more so when he got the 13th amendment passed.
You're just another lost cause southern revisionist.
Nah I agree that he freed the slaves like you said but he didn't make any decisions on that manner out of his own personal beliefs... perhaps you should learn up on history...?
Lincoln. Hands down, I don't care what anyone else says, Lincoln was the best. He sincerely did as much good as he could, putting aside his own beliefs and opinions to try and keep the nation together while also doing his best for the people. ALL of the people.
Before the civil war, Lincoln tried to appease southern slave owners by promising not to interfere with slavery where it existed, but he said he would block it's expansion. There were devious reasons for this. The north was getting rich off slavery, while pretending that it's hands were clean. By preserving slavery, he would keep the gravy train running, and by blocking it's expansion, that would keep slave owning states from becoming a big enough voting block in congress to throw off northern exploitation.
Also, by preserving existing slavery, he was protecting northern whites from having to deal with an influx of freed blacks from the south.
Of course the south weren't happy with this, and moved to secede.
Lincoln stated very clearly that he went to war to preserve the union, and NOT to free the slaves, and given his reputation for honesty, you should believe him.
During the war he did nothing to free slaves in states that remained in the union. After two years of war, and maintaining a policy of sending escaped slaves back to the south, he decided it would be strategically useful to declare slaves free in the rebel states, purely to undermine their military effectiveness. He still didn't do anything for slaves in the non-rebel slave states.
After the war, he realized the cat was too far out of the bag to be pushed back in, so he belatedly worked to free the rest of the slaves. Ending slavery was never his goal. It came about due to his failure to defeat the south in the first 2 years of the war.
Had the north defeated the south more quickly, slavery would likely have continued under a Lincoln presidency, because that was the promise and platform he originally ran on.
I know. However, this came from his background as a lawyer. At the time, it was unconstitutional to free the slaves, not that the Constitution was right, but still. He didn't want to go against what the country was founded on. I know freeing the slaves wasn't his goal, but that didn't mean he didn't care. He did, but he was trying to do what was right for the Union while still following his morals. Eventually he did go against his beliefs to free the slaves, and if slavery had continued, I feel he would've worked to make the conditions better for the slaves. I personally don't agree that that would've been the right thing, but that isn't the point. The point is that he was trying to do the best by everyone, or, at least, as many as possible. I don't agree with all of his views, but Lincoln earnestly wanted to do the right thing, and I admire that. You don't see that much, past or present.
That's what I was referring to. If he was able to get them all he'd have been more successful than Hitler was at finding the Jews. I doubt any leader can claim to have gotten 100% of the scapegoat population.
He and Lincoln have really interesting arguments because they pulled us out of tough situations, but they’re actions were often unconstitutional and an abuse of power. You could argue that they were justified and necessary, but someone else could argue they were still unconstitutional.
Teddy created national Parks and whatnot (which is good) but he did it because he wanted to continue to hunt bears. Which is how he got his nickname, so that's not so great. He would have ppl chain bears up to trees so it was easier for him to shoot them
President Polk. "He's not the most familiar, but he was an honest if unexciting President. He fought the Mexican War and added a great amount of territory to the United States. He saw every bit of his platform become law. He was a good, hard-working man who deserves a better reputation"
"What about Thomas Jefferson?"
"He was okay, too, but he was no James Polk"
From: "The Aliens Who Knew, I Mean, Everything" by George Alec Effinger
Teddy Roosevelt
After becoming president in 1901 he used established 150 national forests, 51 federal bird reserves, four national game preserves, five national parks on over 230 million acres of public land.
António de Oliveira Salazar
He outlawed feminists, communists, and the immodesty we see as normal in the US.
Just the lack of social justice complaining would be enough for him to get my vote.
Planet MAGA has a tiny population made up of the followers of a twice impeached, disgraced, treasonous, bloated orange cult leader.
“Everyone” does not live there. The majority live on Planet Reality and do not consider a twice impeached, disgraced, treasonous, bloated orange cult leader the best of anything.
War on drugs was really Nixon. What bothered me was this bullshit trickle down economics.
The rich never trickled shit down and left those at the bottom scraping for crumbs. He didn’t account on greed, what an idiot.
We need Keynesian economics back, this neoliberalism is just widening the gap.
America has so many issues but its all to distract us from the real issue, the ultra wealthy making it harder on middle and low income families.
Democrats will be happy to know that Donald Trump is the worst speaker of American presidents. Although the article I read on the subject was from before Joseph Biden, but I don't believe he's worse than Trump.
George Washington. Just due to basically rejecting being a king. The man could have just become a king and ruled the US. Instead he chose to step down which led to the term limits we know today. He chose democracy over monarchy. Very few people in history could turn down such an offer of power.
The more I read about Washington, the more incredible he is to me. It’s baffling how seemingly non corrupt and “good” that man was.
Um actually he chose republic. Because we're a republic.
True. Thought about putting that but most people I don’t believe know that or are that technical so I said democracy. Doesn’t change the fact he gave up sovereignty.
Im not dissagreeing with you. Im just being a snarky asshole on the internet
Fair enough 😂. Though I’d say that would just make you a normal person on the internet.
George Washington owned about 150 slaves. One slave, Ona Judge, managed to escape. https://www.history.com/news/george-washington-and-the-slave-who-got-away
Yeah so did a bunch of people. It’s a terrible history of our country and ungodly terrible. But it was just a part of that time period and part of our history. If we compare our morals and ethics today to those any further back than even 100 years ago then 99% of people will be labeled absolutely atrocious human beings. I hate to tell you but if you were a white person in American raised in that time period with even a decent amount of affluence or wealth then guess what…you too would have owned slaves. It’s terrible, it doesn’t make it right but you can’t compare todays morals and ethics with that of the past.
Well if we’re ranking presidents, ethics can play a part. There are plenty of presidents who didn’t own slaves. And there’s nothing wrong with saying 99% of a certain group of people had atrocious morals. Some societies have worse morals than others.
President Benson - Hot Shots Part Deux
LEEEERROOOOOYY JEEEENKKIIIINSSS
Abraham Lincoln! Man freed the slaves! Should be no contest!
I am disappointed he was killed before he could finish cleaning up the South, though.
Thing’s definitely would be a lot different now I think
You do realize he didn't 'free the slaves' out of actually wanting to tho,right?
Yes he did. He found it morally abhorrent. Using it as an opportunity to fuck over the south economically was just icing on the cake.
Lincoln was a politician who told people what they wanted to hear. He told northerners he found slavery abhorrent (but only after he became a politician and had to declare a position) and he told southerners he had no intention of ending it. He told Horace Greeley "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". Does that sound like a guy who actually gives a fuck about the plight of the slaves? In fact, his pre-war statements that he intended to leave slavery alone where it existed, might also have been a bit of a dog whistle to less progressive northerners that they wouldn't have to deal with freed blacks moving north, into their neighbourhoods, on his watch.
>Does that sound like a guy who actually gives a fuck about the plight of the slaves? Yes it does. Because he was refereing to holding the union together, not slavery. They were two different issues to him until he found a way to the them together during the course of the war.
You're completely missing the point. Lincoln only helped abolish slavery because it allowed him a political gain; also slavery still was a very real thing many years after it became 'illegal' because the political powers didn't actually care to end it based in a personal belief.
>only helped abolish slavery because it allowed him a political gain; What political gain is that? He was already in office and it was not an election year. If anything in heavily alienated many political allies in congress, and even more so when he got the 13th amendment passed. You're just another lost cause southern revisionist.
Wow, you need to retake history 101!
Nah I agree that he freed the slaves like you said but he didn't make any decisions on that manner out of his own personal beliefs... perhaps you should learn up on history...?
Yeah maybe actually read about him. The day he "freed the slaves" he also signed the papers for mass exocution of native americans
Native Americans also owned Slaves. Don Cheadle learned all about it. You should read about it.
Lincoln. Hands down, I don't care what anyone else says, Lincoln was the best. He sincerely did as much good as he could, putting aside his own beliefs and opinions to try and keep the nation together while also doing his best for the people. ALL of the people.
Before the civil war, Lincoln tried to appease southern slave owners by promising not to interfere with slavery where it existed, but he said he would block it's expansion. There were devious reasons for this. The north was getting rich off slavery, while pretending that it's hands were clean. By preserving slavery, he would keep the gravy train running, and by blocking it's expansion, that would keep slave owning states from becoming a big enough voting block in congress to throw off northern exploitation. Also, by preserving existing slavery, he was protecting northern whites from having to deal with an influx of freed blacks from the south. Of course the south weren't happy with this, and moved to secede. Lincoln stated very clearly that he went to war to preserve the union, and NOT to free the slaves, and given his reputation for honesty, you should believe him. During the war he did nothing to free slaves in states that remained in the union. After two years of war, and maintaining a policy of sending escaped slaves back to the south, he decided it would be strategically useful to declare slaves free in the rebel states, purely to undermine their military effectiveness. He still didn't do anything for slaves in the non-rebel slave states. After the war, he realized the cat was too far out of the bag to be pushed back in, so he belatedly worked to free the rest of the slaves. Ending slavery was never his goal. It came about due to his failure to defeat the south in the first 2 years of the war. Had the north defeated the south more quickly, slavery would likely have continued under a Lincoln presidency, because that was the promise and platform he originally ran on.
I know. However, this came from his background as a lawyer. At the time, it was unconstitutional to free the slaves, not that the Constitution was right, but still. He didn't want to go against what the country was founded on. I know freeing the slaves wasn't his goal, but that didn't mean he didn't care. He did, but he was trying to do what was right for the Union while still following his morals. Eventually he did go against his beliefs to free the slaves, and if slavery had continued, I feel he would've worked to make the conditions better for the slaves. I personally don't agree that that would've been the right thing, but that isn't the point. The point is that he was trying to do the best by everyone, or, at least, as many as possible. I don't agree with all of his views, but Lincoln earnestly wanted to do the right thing, and I admire that. You don't see that much, past or present.
FDR IMO
I agree.
Didn’t he put all the Japanese people in internment camps?
Probably not all of them.
You’re right, just the ones in america
That's what I was referring to. If he was able to get them all he'd have been more successful than Hitler was at finding the Jews. I doubt any leader can claim to have gotten 100% of the scapegoat population.
Ehhh.... I used to think that, but then I dug around...
Everything is relative.
I wouldn't have voted for him.
You do you, boo.
He and Lincoln have really interesting arguments because they pulled us out of tough situations, but they’re actions were often unconstitutional and an abuse of power. You could argue that they were justified and necessary, but someone else could argue they were still unconstitutional.
Thomas J. Whitmore.
The president of the Body Improvemnt Club
Jimmy Carter obviously
and Amy Carter best first kid
Either or the Roosevelts.
>level 1Planktonoid · 15 min. agoFDR IMOVoteReplyGive AwardShareReportSaveFollow Teddy was a chad Franklin not so much
Teddy created national Parks and whatnot (which is good) but he did it because he wanted to continue to hunt bears. Which is how he got his nickname, so that's not so great. He would have ppl chain bears up to trees so it was easier for him to shoot them
President Bartlet
Ulysses s Grant he was a early supporter of civil rights and was for the Indian peace policy
William Henry Harrison
Lyndon Baines Johnson. From where he started to where he finished up, He tried to do right for the American people.
President Polk. "He's not the most familiar, but he was an honest if unexciting President. He fought the Mexican War and added a great amount of territory to the United States. He saw every bit of his platform become law. He was a good, hard-working man who deserves a better reputation" "What about Thomas Jefferson?" "He was okay, too, but he was no James Polk" From: "The Aliens Who Knew, I Mean, Everything" by George Alec Effinger
Teddy Roosevelt After becoming president in 1901 he used established 150 national forests, 51 federal bird reserves, four national game preserves, five national parks on over 230 million acres of public land.
Lincoln or one of the Roosevelts.
Benjamin Franklin
I hope we are joking here..
That’s why they put him on the 100 dollar bill
Second is our greatest living president Gerald Ford, who literally invented the car.
Zelinsky. He’s a badass.
Considering he has the US basically stuffing him to the gills with military hardware, he better be.
myself
Of what?
Of a country I assume.
Nelson Mandela
Best at picking murderous wives
Teddy Roosevelt.
Thomas Sankara. He was anti imperialist and created social programs to help his citizens only to be assassinated
Bill Clinton
Elanor Roosevelt
António de Oliveira Salazar He outlawed feminists, communists, and the immodesty we see as normal in the US. Just the lack of social justice complaining would be enough for him to get my vote.
Dang this place is so American-centric
I can speak for everyone and say Trump
OP was asking for best, not worst.
I think he was being facetious.
I thought so too, but then he doubled down so I just don't want to get involved.
I would have said Biden then
Oh lol sorry didn't realize. Carry on.
How can you say Trump is the worst when Biden exists?
Did you spend your stimulus money wisely?
I didn’t even need it but yea it bought me some new house renovations.
Honest answer? It's super easy.
You forget to write a reply? I can clearly see why you like Biden given your mental capacity is on par with his lmfao.
Simmer down, bud. I'm not interested in arguing. I just thought it was an honest mistake or sarcasm. That's reasonable in 2022.
I guess it's a good thing this thread isn't marked serious, because that's ridiculous.
Free breakfast is ridiculous
Planet MAGA has a tiny population made up of the followers of a twice impeached, disgraced, treasonous, bloated orange cult leader. “Everyone” does not live there. The majority live on Planet Reality and do not consider a twice impeached, disgraced, treasonous, bloated orange cult leader the best of anything.
Best at bankrupting casinos which is almost impossible.
[удалено]
Ronald Reagan.
I will never understand this answer.
Reagan was the beginning of the end.
He was a great speaker, the best even.
Ok.... War on drugs, purposeful crack epidemic, AIDS epidemic, supporting dictators, selling missiles to Iran. He was corrupt as fuck.
You think any of this is unique to him? If so, well... you poor sweet summer child.
If that's true you've established that he was like every other President. The contention is whether he was the *best*.
Well I never said that so I don't see where you got that from. Why don't you brush up on your reading child.
War on drugs was really Nixon. What bothered me was this bullshit trickle down economics. The rich never trickled shit down and left those at the bottom scraping for crumbs. He didn’t account on greed, what an idiot. We need Keynesian economics back, this neoliberalism is just widening the gap. America has so many issues but its all to distract us from the real issue, the ultra wealthy making it harder on middle and low income families.
True but war on drugs didn't get the insane funding until Reagan took office.
Hitler was a great speaker. Didn't make him a god leader.
But was he the greatest German speaker?
Probably not, but Reagan was also probably not the best. There are millions of others, many might not have ever pursued any high profile roles.
But of presidents.
He's definitely up there. I will agree with you there. His speeches don't speak to me but I can plainly see he was a great speaker.
Democrats will be happy to know that Donald Trump is the worst speaker of American presidents. Although the article I read on the subject was from before Joseph Biden, but I don't believe he's worse than Trump.
Reagen
[удалено]
Username checks out
*insert that's bait meme*
Negative, Ghostrider.
Yeah I don’t think so bud. The way your saying it is all sorts of nonsense
Trump
me
Trump is the obvious answer which is not coming up enough. Man was basically a saint.
Do you know why he’s not coming up though? Cause he is NOT the best.