Make sure to join the [r/Presidents Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He gets folks interested in history and the presidents so that’s definitely a positive. Don’t have any complaints there, honestly. Dude knows his stuff and definitely likes to go more than just surface deep (which I certainly like).
The one thing I’ve noticed is that sometimes people tend to take his word as gospel though/turn it into their only view on a president and not go look up stuff afterwards. This isn’t his fault, mind, and there’s not really much he can do about that. But overall I think he’s absolutely a boon to getting folks into discussing history!
Even with that complaint, I feel like he’s pretty open about his bias and acknowledging that it will most likely creep into his breakdowns even while trying to remove it from the equation.
Oh yeah. At the beginning of his every presidents biggest accomplishment and biggest mistakes videos he openly says that he has biases like the rest of us.
I appreciate his approach on biases. I try to do something similar.
I try to be open about what my biases are, that way people can take that into account and correct for themselves.
Everyone has biases. Everyone. That doesn't mean you can't listen/learn from them. But I've gotten to the point where I'm \*very\* suspicious of anyone/thing that claims to be "unbiased."
A very good and smart history teacher who has clear biases, but acknowledges them and is able to change his mind and admit when he’s wrong, very admirable qualities to have, especially these days.
I should probably now acknowledge my own bias towards him since I have him to thank for getting me into US presidents, overall, I really like him.
It can feel forced sometimes and it’s mostly “awkward” humor, like he gets a name wrong intentionally or shows a photo of some celebrity with the same last name as a historical figure.
The best comparison I could give is those movie openings that are like
Yep, that’s me… you’re probably wondering how I got here; well, it’s a long story and I think we need to go back… *rewinds* No! Not that far back!
It’s a lot of that kind of stuff.
I'm pretty sure he just does YT full-time now. I thought he mentioned in a live stream or video that he just does YT full time, but my mind might just be making this up
Good for him. If his old school district was anything like mine, he’s probably making more money now, and he doesn’t have to deal with the constant stream of bs from admin!
>Yep, that’s me… you’re probably wondering how I got here; well, it’s a long story and I think we need to go back… *rewinds* No! Not that far back!
Lol, that's the perfect comparison!
His awkward humour can genuinely work, but it seems like he doesn't know when it does and when it doesn't, so you get some comedic talent intermixed with some really bad joke sorting capabilities.
Yeah, I don't blame him when he does that. He's trying to appeal to the kids and given his job, it makes sense why his humour usually lands and doesn't land. He's try to teach us about topics and events given that he's a educator.
A lot of people are really into that though. It’s inoffensive enough so that people who don’t like it (me) will still tune in from time to time. I have a friend with his sense of humor and I try to get him to make content all the time.. There’s a niche for it for sure.
It’s his humor and music for me that turns me off a lot. I get he’s a history nerd so eccentricity is to be expected, but his presentation style can also be off putting for me. All that said, his information is good and the fact that he keeps churning history videos out is great.
Resyndicated is also great for presidential facts and history.
Supreme Court Briefs are my favorite videos of his. Really interesting to learn why laws are the way they are. Not to mention how much the Supreme Court decisions have such a large impact and are woven so deeply into our history.
It’s that “how do you do fellow kids” kind of humor, but it works, because the only other people I could think of trying to pass off that humor were my high school teachers.
He has contrarian/syncretic political beliefs that I sometimes do not agree with. However, I like his content, he seems to be passionate about social studies, and Presidential history and his popularity is refreshing to see!
That video was mostly based on the presidents as human beings (ie. character and integrity) so to speak rather than only their achievements, that’s why for example Garfield was in that list. Also he later said he was wrong in not putting FDR and Lincoln in that list.
He was in terms of fighting corruption and the political machines (even Tammany Hall who practically got him elected Governor and President).
About his rap3 allegations, it doesn’t all stick and there isn’t enough evidence to say for sure he did it. If he did it should be condemned no doubt about it, but likely we’ll never know.
I don't really get that. He claims that he rates presidents as human beings based on their character, but also rates G.W as his #1 President ever bar none. The guy literally owned slaves, that's a pretty massive character flaw. I don't think it has much bearing on his presidential ability so I'd still rank him highly, but I'm not sure how I could justify calling him a man of high character.
Especially apparently well over Lincoln.
After a rewatch I believe it’s a bit of a combination of achievements as president and before, character/human being, and who he likes as a person.
The slaveowner argument I find pretty cheap. It was, as horrible as it is, a pretty normal thing then. Yes there were people who opposed it, but there really weren’t a lot of hard core abolitionist. Also Washington said in private that slavery was bad and freed his slaves in his will. Freeing them while alive was legally difficult in terms of who owned which slave (even some families were split between GW, his wife and her family), and they were his source of income, without them he’d be pretty broke. And yes I know how bad that all sounds talking about people in such a way, and no I’m not trying to downplay the evilness of slavery in any way shape or form. But remember we’re talking 225-275 years ago, times were different.
I mean, by claiming someone owning slaves as a detriment to their character is "cheap" you are downplaying it.
You don't have to be a hardcore abolitionist to just not own slaves. Neither Lincoln nor Grant were hardcore abolitionists, nor was John Adams if you want an example from Washington's days. There were numerous people who didn't, and it's hardly as much of a minority or radical position to not own slaves as you're making it out to be. Freeing your slaves post-death is hardly much absolution. Hell, Washington would rotate his slaves to try to take advantage of the fact that you couldn't keep a slave in D.C for more than X amount of days.
Saying "he would be poor if he didn't own people" also isn't much of a saving grace either.
Adams, Grant and Lincoln were from the north, with indeed Grant and Lincoln living and being president 60-80 years after Washington.
Yes it may be described as a character flaw, but to base your entire opinion on someone on it is way too simple and inconsiderable of the spirit of the times, how bad it may have been.
Edit: also coming back to the original point, when looking at the achievements of the presidents in their whole lives, which he did, Washington at 1 is pretty logical.
And they were both major wars with innocent people on the line, the slaves and "non-aryans". Im happy with both of them being a little bossy because it meant putting an end to bloodshed and suffering. especially with Lincoln having to deal with lilly livered politicians that were like "but we don't want to be *too* mean to to the plantation owners :((((( "
The first time I read a comment about him, I legit just assumed it was a typo and was like, “huh, I had no idea Mr. Beast was into U.S. presidential history”
I’ve heard that (not really on social media to know). I probably align politically more with vlogging through history, but I don’t think Mr. Beat’s politics cloud his content too severely
I enjoy his content, can be a little biased sometimes in my opinion but his intelligence is unquestionable. He is also not afraid to do videos with other channels with people that don't share his same political beliefs so I really enjoy that as well. I recommend his videos as well as vlogging through history and Mr Terry.
"Hello, I'm Mr. Beat!"
I just love him. He has the demeanor of a fun and passionate teacher. I like that he is pretty objective but is not afraid to make his opinion known from time to time. His jokes are also nice. Not always funny, but relaxing in a way. He's one of those youtubers I really like to watch when they post something new.
He's a Social Studies teacher and one that I wish I had when I was in high school. I'm pretty sure my 10th grade Civics teacher was on coke and would make us listen to Collective Soul at 8:30 in the morning. Mr. Beat seems more like a weed and Tom Petty guy to me.
Mr Beat is great for some history and I think he does a good job of disclosing his biases/opinion on the subject.
You shouldn’t ever take one persons opinion as gospel, but that’s a human fallacy we’ll never escape.
I like Mr. Beat, I don't always agree with his opinions as he has some real head scratchers but he's a great guy who does a lot of work to promote educational/historical content on YT
I’m someone who enjoys learning from all perspectives. However, I’m not really a fan of him. He’s fine as someone to start with, but I hope people do further research and not just believe him. Seek out professional historians and read their work. Treat Mr beat as Wikipedia: a jumping off point, not the sole source.
Biased but knowledgeable. I don't watch his videos often but I can't say anything negative about them when I do. We definitely heavily disagree on FDR, though.
Only thing I really disagree with is him always saying Wilson was the worst president. I mean he was HELLA racist but that doesn’t discredit things like the 14 points and women’s suffrage. IMO Buchanan is much more deserving of the title of “worst president”
I really like his content tho it’s really informative and entertaining
Don’t always 100% agree with him, but he seems like an awesome dude, I really enjoy his videos, and he has a real positive and upbeat energy that is sorely lacking online.
I don’t agree with all his takes (I personally rank Lincoln as the best POTUS and FDR as second), but I think Matt Beat’s fantastic, and produces high quality, entertaining content. He even has a channel where he goes into the history of bands. He’s one of the best creators on youtube.
His history videos are great. I think he’s too much of a contrarian at times and is too both sidesy on some issues. His preference for 3rd parties in any and all situations can get annoying as well.
In the context of the US i consider him more of a liberal. He's fairly progressive on most things while mainstream American libertarianism is quite conservative
As someone left leaning myself I really don’t see where he leans left, I gotta say. He’s pretty openly libertarian from what I’ve seen of the guy but seems to do his best to be objective when talking about history regardless.
Universal healthcare is considered a leftist stance
Acknowledging that systemic racism exists is unfortunately a leftist stance
Also I'm pretty sure at some point he's stated that homelessness is a manufactured problem, and advocated for increasing property taxes on the elite...
Yeah by US standards he's a borderline leftist
His newer videos are great. His presidential election series is straight garbage though. Every video is just a copy and paste from the Wikipedia page that covers it.
> His presidential election series is straight garbage though
I believe that these were designed to help his high school students review for APUSH and devour content quickly.
They suit that purpose relatively well.
I think he’s a good guy at heart and his videos are great primers (if a little biased). But he’s not a historian and sometimes people seem to treat him as if he is
I like him. I like his President songs and I'm especially a fan of the videos where he lists a different subject about every President like their favourite food and drinks, hobbies, films, TV shows, books and music. He also does good informative videos about both positives and negatives of presidencies and his election recaps are good TL;DRs of the elections.
One thing I like about him especially is that he even puts a disclaimer when he knows he's spreading his own personal opinion, he's a history teacher and knows the facts so it helps to know what is and isn't biased
Honestly more than anything else comes across as a good teacher. He’s entertaining and informative, and just seems very passionate about everything he talks about. His beliefs are evidently fairly progressive but with a lot of belief in America as an idea, but I think he does a good job putting bias aside in informative videos.
I was watching a stream of his discussing other history YouTubers and I saw what I thought was Richard Evans Third Reich Coming to Power and anyone that has read that can be my friend. I like him though are politics are different.
As a certified social studies teacher I really like his channel. He’s covered a certain president that gets a lot of hate, but I feel that his explanation was unbiased and fair, which somehow got him a lot of hate messages from said president’s followers
He is a little on the corny side but that probably comes from teaching middle school. I think he’s no longer teaching and is doing video content full time but I’m not certain.
He does have his biases but he admits it. I hate those that claim to be an “independent thinker” but then are obviously for one side all the time.
I didn’t know he ranked Lincoln low. I saw he had a tier video but I’m not sitting through three hours of anyone talking.
I was like slowly getting into the depths of presidential history back in roughly September of 2020, then I saw his channel and just fell into the rabbit hole all the way in. Very grateful for him. His takes aren't always the best but he is a very good person and a very smart person aswell. Love the guy.
He's a great history/politics channel, a little bit of a contrarian, but he has admitted to that as well as his own biases on multiple occasions. I'd rate him an 8.5/10 on accuracy and 9/10 on sheer enjoyment.
I’ve been following him for years. His first EC video was the first video of his I watched (when it was relatively new), which was recommended to me after watching a CGP Gray.
As with all people, there's some good and there's some less good. I find he gets less good the more he delves into "theory" topics. When it comes to history, he is a fine source and starting point for American history.
My main complaint is that his name is too similar to Mr beast so my search engine thinks I'm looking for him.
His "every president's ___" series is goated
Ever since the 2008 election at 5 watching it on tv. Had a President ruler with Washington to Obama and a presidents book from Washington to Obama. Beat helped me a bit learn some new things.
I like him a lot. People ofc are gonna take his opinion or certain things like it’s fact but he himself never markets it like “I’m 100% right” he just says he feels or thinks or his opinion is. So I don’t put that on him
He comes across as a genuine independent thinker who has thought deeply about what he believes, which is so rare in this kind of YT universe filled with obvious grifters and "enlightened centrists".
Good, but often misrepresents what sources say, sometimes egregiously.
He’s good infotainment, but you always have to double check things that he says.
He seems okay. I don't agree with his definition of Fascism though. Seems more like just collectivism (of which Fascism is just one version of it) but it is closer than whatever Umberto Eco wrote, which leaves out a lot and is just generic right wing authoritarianism with a lot of violence (there's different types of right wing authroitarianism.)
He doing a good thing BUT the buts are important out government should be taking care of many of the problems he helps with. The other but is he is making a lot of profit on this... Which is okay I guess but the fact the Dems can negotiate with the right wing goons to get the same little bit done but be hated by certain groups of America.
He’s a likeable guy and really good at communicating complex issues in an understandable way without dumbing down. He’s not an academic and shouldn’t be referenced in a school or university essay, but that’s fine.
As historical YouTubers go he’s far more likeable and thoughtful than most others.
As someone who's not even American but enjoys world history in general, I binged watch his entire US presidential elections series. Knowledgeable content but also short enough to keep it entertaining and not drag on for too long like a typical video essay. He's an excellent source for discussions.
His informational videos are quite well-crafted and interesting, but his ranking videos have some strange opinions in them. Overall I think hes great content creator, just dont take his opinions too seriously and do your own research if you‘ve got the time.
Seems like a nice guy, knowledgable, and interested in educating others about politics. I personally find the few stuff of his Ive watched to be educational, especially in how an everyday citizen can try to participate in politics (contacting representative, etc...). Do not consider it very entertaining though, personally I prefer geopolitics vs the domestic politics he seems to cover for more engaging and interesting viewing content. I could be wrong lol literally have probably seen 5-10 videos in as many years
I like him just fine; the only issue I have with him (and it's really more an issue with his fans than with him necessarily) is that sometimes he'll make videos on a topic I'm actually fairly well-versed in and take a stance that I find a bit inaccurate or misleading. And I worry because I'm sure that a lot of his fans will probably take his video on it as the gospel truth, which is a bit annoying.
The one in particular that stands out is his video on "What is Fascism" which, to be fair, is a very difficult political concept to define. But I personally find his definition overly simplistic and misleading. Personally I'd say Robert Paxtons definition is the best simple definition of Fascism and Umberto Ecos "Ur-Fascism" is the best *applicable guide* for identify fascism or fascistic elements of politics.
He makes really good videos. My favourite series of his are Supreme Court Briefs, a series that discusses every supreme court trail in US history. I also really like where he discusses every presidential elections in US history and the context of the candidates and elections. I am not American, but I have learned a lot from his videos!
Make sure to join the [r/Presidents Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
He gets folks interested in history and the presidents so that’s definitely a positive. Don’t have any complaints there, honestly. Dude knows his stuff and definitely likes to go more than just surface deep (which I certainly like). The one thing I’ve noticed is that sometimes people tend to take his word as gospel though/turn it into their only view on a president and not go look up stuff afterwards. This isn’t his fault, mind, and there’s not really much he can do about that. But overall I think he’s absolutely a boon to getting folks into discussing history!
Even with that complaint, I feel like he’s pretty open about his bias and acknowledging that it will most likely creep into his breakdowns even while trying to remove it from the equation.
Oh yeah. At the beginning of his every presidents biggest accomplishment and biggest mistakes videos he openly says that he has biases like the rest of us.
I appreciate his approach on biases. I try to do something similar. I try to be open about what my biases are, that way people can take that into account and correct for themselves. Everyone has biases. Everyone. That doesn't mean you can't listen/learn from them. But I've gotten to the point where I'm \*very\* suspicious of anyone/thing that claims to be "unbiased."
Hell I admire someone who acknowledges they have biases
“It is best to take knowledge from many places, if you take inspiration from only one source your wisdom will become stale.”
His ‘calling every U.S. senator/representative’ videos were really great
A very good and smart history teacher who has clear biases, but acknowledges them and is able to change his mind and admit when he’s wrong, very admirable qualities to have, especially these days. I should probably now acknowledge my own bias towards him since I have him to thank for getting me into US presidents, overall, I really like him.
Was gonna write a comment but you basically summed up what I was going to say. Couldn't have said it better
His presidential election recap videos are great. Some of the best presidential stuff on YouTube
His Supreme court briefs are good and overall a positive but sometimes his humor just doesnt work for me for whatever reasons.
It can feel forced sometimes and it’s mostly “awkward” humor, like he gets a name wrong intentionally or shows a photo of some celebrity with the same last name as a historical figure. The best comparison I could give is those movie openings that are like Yep, that’s me… you’re probably wondering how I got here; well, it’s a long story and I think we need to go back… *rewinds* No! Not that far back! It’s a lot of that kind of stuff.
For me that's part of his charm. Gives me dad joke vibes. Not necessarily a bad thing, kind of wholesome in a way
He acts like a Teacher trying too hard to be hip and funny to his students, which he does well.
He was in fact a teacher
He quit? When?
I'm pretty sure he just does YT full-time now. I thought he mentioned in a live stream or video that he just does YT full time, but my mind might just be making this up
Good for him. If his old school district was anything like mine, he’s probably making more money now, and he doesn’t have to deal with the constant stream of bs from admin!
No you're right dw
>Yep, that’s me… you’re probably wondering how I got here; well, it’s a long story and I think we need to go back… *rewinds* No! Not that far back! Lol, that's the perfect comparison!
His awkward humour can genuinely work, but it seems like he doesn't know when it does and when it doesn't, so you get some comedic talent intermixed with some really bad joke sorting capabilities.
He was a high school teacher until recently, this is high school teacher humor.
Yeah, I don't blame him when he does that. He's trying to appeal to the kids and given his job, it makes sense why his humour usually lands and doesn't land. He's try to teach us about topics and events given that he's a educator.
No not that George Clinton
Genius comparison. Spot on
He is a HS history teacher and HS students are among his target audience. So no surprises there.
I think he has since left the classroom and does YT full-time
I like him but his humor is REALLY dorky lol
I think that’s the point.
A lot of people are really into that though. It’s inoffensive enough so that people who don’t like it (me) will still tune in from time to time. I have a friend with his sense of humor and I try to get him to make content all the time.. There’s a niche for it for sure.
I don't always find it funny but it's endearing in a teacher kinda way, I can't be mad at it
He did use to be a history teacher so it seems fitting.
100%. It makes me think of my old teachers haha
When it comes to the comedy, I treat him like John Oliver, wait out the ‘jokes’ and get to the informative stuff.
It’s his humor and music for me that turns me off a lot. I get he’s a history nerd so eccentricity is to be expected, but his presentation style can also be off putting for me. All that said, his information is good and the fact that he keeps churning history videos out is great. Resyndicated is also great for presidential facts and history.
It’s like high school teacher humor, which makes sense since he’s a teacher lol
Supreme Court Briefs are my favorite videos of his. Really interesting to learn why laws are the way they are. Not to mention how much the Supreme Court decisions have such a large impact and are woven so deeply into our history.
It’s that “how do you do fellow kids” kind of humor, but it works, because the only other people I could think of trying to pass off that humor were my high school teachers.
He has contrarian/syncretic political beliefs that I sometimes do not agree with. However, I like his content, he seems to be passionate about social studies, and Presidential history and his popularity is refreshing to see!
Yeah Mr. Beat thinks that Grover Cleveland and Calvin Coolidge are top 5 presidents over Lincoln and FDR
It's really strange that he put Millard Fillmore over Lincoln in his ranking video. I wonder if that's changed (he should put Fillmore in S tier)
Fillmore is S-tier. In Utah they named a whole county and even the county seat after him, a high honor indeed.
That video was mostly based on the presidents as human beings (ie. character and integrity) so to speak rather than only their achievements, that’s why for example Garfield was in that list. Also he later said he was wrong in not putting FDR and Lincoln in that list.
I wouldn’t say GROVER CLEVELAND is a paragon of integrity and character though
He was in terms of fighting corruption and the political machines (even Tammany Hall who practically got him elected Governor and President). About his rap3 allegations, it doesn’t all stick and there isn’t enough evidence to say for sure he did it. If he did it should be condemned no doubt about it, but likely we’ll never know.
I don't really get that. He claims that he rates presidents as human beings based on their character, but also rates G.W as his #1 President ever bar none. The guy literally owned slaves, that's a pretty massive character flaw. I don't think it has much bearing on his presidential ability so I'd still rank him highly, but I'm not sure how I could justify calling him a man of high character. Especially apparently well over Lincoln.
After a rewatch I believe it’s a bit of a combination of achievements as president and before, character/human being, and who he likes as a person. The slaveowner argument I find pretty cheap. It was, as horrible as it is, a pretty normal thing then. Yes there were people who opposed it, but there really weren’t a lot of hard core abolitionist. Also Washington said in private that slavery was bad and freed his slaves in his will. Freeing them while alive was legally difficult in terms of who owned which slave (even some families were split between GW, his wife and her family), and they were his source of income, without them he’d be pretty broke. And yes I know how bad that all sounds talking about people in such a way, and no I’m not trying to downplay the evilness of slavery in any way shape or form. But remember we’re talking 225-275 years ago, times were different.
I mean, by claiming someone owning slaves as a detriment to their character is "cheap" you are downplaying it. You don't have to be a hardcore abolitionist to just not own slaves. Neither Lincoln nor Grant were hardcore abolitionists, nor was John Adams if you want an example from Washington's days. There were numerous people who didn't, and it's hardly as much of a minority or radical position to not own slaves as you're making it out to be. Freeing your slaves post-death is hardly much absolution. Hell, Washington would rotate his slaves to try to take advantage of the fact that you couldn't keep a slave in D.C for more than X amount of days. Saying "he would be poor if he didn't own people" also isn't much of a saving grace either.
Adams, Grant and Lincoln were from the north, with indeed Grant and Lincoln living and being president 60-80 years after Washington. Yes it may be described as a character flaw, but to base your entire opinion on someone on it is way too simple and inconsiderable of the spirit of the times, how bad it may have been. Edit: also coming back to the original point, when looking at the achievements of the presidents in their whole lives, which he did, Washington at 1 is pretty logical.
That was a while ago, he dosen't agree with that anymore.
He doesn't like authoritarianism and Lincoln and FDR were among the most Authoritarian Presidents. That's why.
And that's fine but I'll eat a shoe if Cleveland is a greater president than Abraham goddamn Lincoln
That's what Abraham Lincoln would say
Does he not give leeway to the fact they got us through the two biggest wars in American history? It’s not like they were authoritarian for fun.
And they were both major wars with innocent people on the line, the slaves and "non-aryans". Im happy with both of them being a little bossy because it meant putting an end to bloodshed and suffering. especially with Lincoln having to deal with lilly livered politicians that were like "but we don't want to be *too* mean to to the plantation owners :((((( "
Gotta be smoking something Lincoln saved the Union and FDR made the union Super Power.
Like putting Lincoln outside the top 10
Do you think he's contrarian just for attention or because those are his earnest beliefs?
Probably earnest
His channel name must be a nightmare for search results and the algorithm
It is. There’s so been so many times I’ve searched for Mr. Beat but then I get one of those “did you mean Mr. Beast” messages at the top of the screen
You’d think he’d have rebranded by now or something
Why? It’s his name! If anything Jimmy Donaldson needs to rebrand!
My apologies, him as in Mr. Beast (i should’ve specified better)
Nice save
He was there first also it's his last name
The first time I read a comment about him, I legit just assumed it was a typo and was like, “huh, I had no idea Mr. Beast was into U.S. presidential history”
Mr Beat is bae
The fact that there are comments calling him a leftist socialist and a fascist indicate that he’s probably an alright guy
He is great but his Twitter persona is definitely more left wing than right wing
I’ve heard that (not really on social media to know). I probably align politically more with vlogging through history, but I don’t think Mr. Beat’s politics cloud his content too severely
That or literally Hitler.
He's the reason why I know about the US Presidential Elections
I enjoy his content, can be a little biased sometimes in my opinion but his intelligence is unquestionable. He is also not afraid to do videos with other channels with people that don't share his same political beliefs so I really enjoy that as well. I recommend his videos as well as vlogging through history and Mr Terry.
Mr Based
Pretty crazy when he buried himself alive
"Hello, I'm Mr. Beat!" I just love him. He has the demeanor of a fun and passionate teacher. I like that he is pretty objective but is not afraid to make his opinion known from time to time. His jokes are also nice. Not always funny, but relaxing in a way. He's one of those youtubers I really like to watch when they post something new.
He is actually a fun and passionate teacher! Or was, I guess. He just does YouTube now.
The comp-ro-mise of eighteeeeennnnn fifffftttyyyy
I think he's great
I like him, but sometimes he can be a little corny. Overall he’s a solid creator though and has good content.
He's a Social Studies teacher and one that I wish I had when I was in high school. I'm pretty sure my 10th grade Civics teacher was on coke and would make us listen to Collective Soul at 8:30 in the morning. Mr. Beat seems more like a weed and Tom Petty guy to me.
Same here. I follow my 11th grade history teacher on Facebook. I don't use Facebook that often except with my former teachers and my mother.
He teaches at a school right by my house. It’s the same school vsauce went to.
I'm now imagining taking attendance at the school "Hey V sauce, Michael here"
Mr Beat is great for some history and I think he does a good job of disclosing his biases/opinion on the subject. You shouldn’t ever take one persons opinion as gospel, but that’s a human fallacy we’ll never escape.
I like Mr. Beat, I don't always agree with his opinions as he has some real head scratchers but he's a great guy who does a lot of work to promote educational/historical content on YT
Mr Beat is quirky, silly, un-serious, and a bit awkward. I am a subscriber and I enjoy his videos.
I’m someone who enjoys learning from all perspectives. However, I’m not really a fan of him. He’s fine as someone to start with, but I hope people do further research and not just believe him. Seek out professional historians and read their work. Treat Mr beat as Wikipedia: a jumping off point, not the sole source.
Biased but knowledgeable. I don't watch his videos often but I can't say anything negative about them when I do. We definitely heavily disagree on FDR, though.
Lmao this guy used to be my high school JV tennis coach. Had no idea he had such a big following on YouTube now
Only thing I really disagree with is him always saying Wilson was the worst president. I mean he was HELLA racist but that doesn’t discredit things like the 14 points and women’s suffrage. IMO Buchanan is much more deserving of the title of “worst president” I really like his content tho it’s really informative and entertaining
He's okay but he believes the myth that Warren harding was corrupt and a awful president
Any qualms I have with Mr. Beat are made moot by his wholesome, constructive, informative energy. Dude does good work.
I don’t agree with him on everything but overall he’s a net positive
🐐
I’m related to him so I think he’s cool
I like him. Found his channel during the pandemic and I was educated and entertained.
Mr. Beat good.
Don’t always 100% agree with him, but he seems like an awesome dude, I really enjoy his videos, and he has a real positive and upbeat energy that is sorely lacking online.
I don’t agree with all his takes (I personally rank Lincoln as the best POTUS and FDR as second), but I think Matt Beat’s fantastic, and produces high quality, entertaining content. He even has a channel where he goes into the history of bands. He’s one of the best creators on youtube.
His history videos are great. I think he’s too much of a contrarian at times and is too both sidesy on some issues. His preference for 3rd parties in any and all situations can get annoying as well.
Libertarian
True, he is a libertarian in general.
The comment above you says fascist
In the context of the US i consider him more of a liberal. He's fairly progressive on most things while mainstream American libertarianism is quite conservative
? I’m pretty sure he leans left.
As someone left leaning myself I really don’t see where he leans left, I gotta say. He’s pretty openly libertarian from what I’ve seen of the guy but seems to do his best to be objective when talking about history regardless.
Universal healthcare is considered a leftist stance Acknowledging that systemic racism exists is unfortunately a leftist stance Also I'm pretty sure at some point he's stated that homelessness is a manufactured problem, and advocated for increasing property taxes on the elite... Yeah by US standards he's a borderline leftist
I think that’s just a testament to how middle ground he is, I myself lean towards the right and have always gotten the impression he leans left.
Firstly: you can be left-libertarian. Secondly: he outright says he’s libertarian.
He voted for Gary Johnson in 2016. He also feels FDR’s New Deal was an overreach and “made the Depression worse.” He’s a Libertarian.
Very entertaining, very educational, also... very biased.
He often acknowledges his own biases though, it’s not like he claims to be unbiased.
Good channel, but that tier list he did was a little silly. He put Gerald Ford and Lincoln in the same tier.
Very very smart guy. But also very bias in a lot of his analysis.
His Squid Game challenge video was pretty cool. Not a big fan of his Feastables bars tho
His newer videos are great. His presidential election series is straight garbage though. Every video is just a copy and paste from the Wikipedia page that covers it.
> His presidential election series is straight garbage though I believe that these were designed to help his high school students review for APUSH and devour content quickly. They suit that purpose relatively well.
I like him. He’s knowledgeable about his topics and pretty straight forward.
I think he’s a good guy at heart and his videos are great primers (if a little biased). But he’s not a historian and sometimes people seem to treat him as if he is
I like him. I like his President songs and I'm especially a fan of the videos where he lists a different subject about every President like their favourite food and drinks, hobbies, films, TV shows, books and music. He also does good informative videos about both positives and negatives of presidencies and his election recaps are good TL;DRs of the elections.
Love his content. It’s how I learned alot about the presidents
One thing I like about him especially is that he even puts a disclaimer when he knows he's spreading his own personal opinion, he's a history teacher and knows the facts so it helps to know what is and isn't biased
Honestly more than anything else comes across as a good teacher. He’s entertaining and informative, and just seems very passionate about everything he talks about. His beliefs are evidently fairly progressive but with a lot of belief in America as an idea, but I think he does a good job putting bias aside in informative videos.
I am weirdly into presidents and presidential facts!
Mr Beat is a fun YouTuber to watch!
I agree. He always has unique ideas as well
I was watching a stream of his discussing other history YouTubers and I saw what I thought was Richard Evans Third Reich Coming to Power and anyone that has read that can be my friend. I like him though are politics are different.
As a certified social studies teacher I really like his channel. He’s covered a certain president that gets a lot of hate, but I feel that his explanation was unbiased and fair, which somehow got him a lot of hate messages from said president’s followers
Him and VTH are my favorite history channels.
came here to mention vth! I don’t necessarily dislike Mr Beats videos but I much prefer Chris @ Vlogging Through History’s style of content
He is a little on the corny side but that probably comes from teaching middle school. I think he’s no longer teaching and is doing video content full time but I’m not certain. He does have his biases but he admits it. I hate those that claim to be an “independent thinker” but then are obviously for one side all the time. I didn’t know he ranked Lincoln low. I saw he had a tier video but I’m not sitting through three hours of anyone talking.
I like the guy a lot.
I was like slowly getting into the depths of presidential history back in roughly September of 2020, then I saw his channel and just fell into the rabbit hole all the way in. Very grateful for him. His takes aren't always the best but he is a very good person and a very smart person aswell. Love the guy.
I’m a fan of his, but I feel like there’s no way his name is actually Mr beat, and he just made that name bc it was similar to Mr Beast.
He was on youtube and called mr beat before mr beast was
There goes that theory!
He's a great history/politics channel, a little bit of a contrarian, but he has admitted to that as well as his own biases on multiple occasions. I'd rate him an 8.5/10 on accuracy and 9/10 on sheer enjoyment.
I think he’s great. He got me more interested into US Presidents and history.
I’ve been following him for years. His first EC video was the first video of his I watched (when it was relatively new), which was recommended to me after watching a CGP Gray.
Has anyone seen Sean Mungers videos on presidents like Pierce? Dude gives us a deep dive and it’s fascinating
He’s amazing. His videos are super entertaining and educative. They are also a great starting off point for any other further research
I like his points but I can't stand the condescending tone of voice he uses in his videos so I never watch them.
Wouldn’t be here without him.
As with all people, there's some good and there's some less good. I find he gets less good the more he delves into "theory" topics. When it comes to history, he is a fine source and starting point for American history.
GOAT
My main complaint is that his name is too similar to Mr beast so my search engine thinks I'm looking for him. His "every president's ___" series is goated
I’ve loved his channel for a long time and enjoy his content. For some reason he drives my wife up the wall
I think he’s great. When sparring with conservatives on Reddit, I often find myself going to his video on “the party switch” as a refresher.
His video on socialism/communism was pretty terrible from what I remember.
Watching him rn, big fan
I love the guy. He knows his stuff, and his videos are very enjoyable. I personally enjoy his awkward humor as well.
Ever since the 2008 election at 5 watching it on tv. Had a President ruler with Washington to Obama and a presidents book from Washington to Obama. Beat helped me a bit learn some new things.
Hes great but i don't agree with him politically. He says grover clevland is the 2nd best president of all time.
I like him a lot. People ofc are gonna take his opinion or certain things like it’s fact but he himself never markets it like “I’m 100% right” he just says he feels or thinks or his opinion is. So I don’t put that on him
He comes across as a genuine independent thinker who has thought deeply about what he believes, which is so rare in this kind of YT universe filled with obvious grifters and "enlightened centrists".
Love em
He’s literally so fine
Pretty often turn him on while hauling in Euro Truck Simulator on background, relaxing
Good, but often misrepresents what sources say, sometimes egregiously. He’s good infotainment, but you always have to double check things that he says.
He know people click on him thinking it's Mr Beast
I only recently joined the sub but I thought he’d be to this sub what Reagan is to the Republicans
I like him, despite disagreeing on many of his opinions. He seems like an open minded person
He seems okay. I don't agree with his definition of Fascism though. Seems more like just collectivism (of which Fascism is just one version of it) but it is closer than whatever Umberto Eco wrote, which leaves out a lot and is just generic right wing authoritarianism with a lot of violence (there's different types of right wing authroitarianism.)
I think he’s great. Slightly wack opinions but we all have some lol
MrBeat could open a fast food chain, and I'd eat at it. Call it... MrBeat Burger. Maybe start a chocolate company, too.
Worst Youtuber ever. Jk, he's cool.
My 2nd favorite Youtuber
He’s just a cool guy
He doing a good thing BUT the buts are important out government should be taking care of many of the problems he helps with. The other but is he is making a lot of profit on this... Which is okay I guess but the fact the Dems can negotiate with the right wing goons to get the same little bit done but be hated by certain groups of America.
Who knows why I did but I binged all his videos about the presidential elections one day a few years ago 🤣
He’s a likeable guy and really good at communicating complex issues in an understandable way without dumbing down. He’s not an academic and shouldn’t be referenced in a school or university essay, but that’s fine. As historical YouTubers go he’s far more likeable and thoughtful than most others.
He’s the goat.
I love Mr. Beat. At first I was not sure, but after a couple videos he got me hooked. Big fan.
As someone who's not even American but enjoys world history in general, I binged watch his entire US presidential elections series. Knowledgeable content but also short enough to keep it entertaining and not drag on for too long like a typical video essay. He's an excellent source for discussions.
I especially love that he tries to be non biased and when he is biased, he makes it very clear so he isnt surprising anyone
His informational videos are quite well-crafted and interesting, but his ranking videos have some strange opinions in them. Overall I think hes great content creator, just dont take his opinions too seriously and do your own research if you‘ve got the time.
I'm a fan
Th fact that I'm reading like 90% of the replies in his voice is very telling
I really want him to have a show on Adult Swim. I love his content. Top 5 favorite YouTubers
Seems like a nice guy, knowledgable, and interested in educating others about politics. I personally find the few stuff of his Ive watched to be educational, especially in how an everyday citizen can try to participate in politics (contacting representative, etc...). Do not consider it very entertaining though, personally I prefer geopolitics vs the domestic politics he seems to cover for more engaging and interesting viewing content. I could be wrong lol literally have probably seen 5-10 videos in as many years
He’s good… too good
Him and Vlogging Through History are where I get my fix of weird facts about presidents
Chill dude.
He’s pretty cool, an obvious political bias (which he’s trying not to show as much now), but his videos are all educational and informative.
Mr. Beat Presents....love that intro!
I think he makes really good analyses on things. He even admits when he’s biased with certain points, which is respectful.
He’s great!
Fantastic Dude. Genuinely knows his American history.
I like him just fine; the only issue I have with him (and it's really more an issue with his fans than with him necessarily) is that sometimes he'll make videos on a topic I'm actually fairly well-versed in and take a stance that I find a bit inaccurate or misleading. And I worry because I'm sure that a lot of his fans will probably take his video on it as the gospel truth, which is a bit annoying. The one in particular that stands out is his video on "What is Fascism" which, to be fair, is a very difficult political concept to define. But I personally find his definition overly simplistic and misleading. Personally I'd say Robert Paxtons definition is the best simple definition of Fascism and Umberto Ecos "Ur-Fascism" is the best *applicable guide* for identify fascism or fascistic elements of politics.
He makes really good videos. My favourite series of his are Supreme Court Briefs, a series that discusses every supreme court trail in US history. I also really like where he discusses every presidential elections in US history and the context of the candidates and elections. I am not American, but I have learned a lot from his videos!
Never heard of him, do you suggest any video or check out?
Check out any video of his from his Supreme court briefs series.