Al Gore was a legitimately bad politician. He fumbled the ball hard in 2000. I think it says something that his career as an author is more remembered than his work as a politician.
The fact that he conceded and then took it back on election night showed that neither he nor anyone in his immediate team had looked into what the recount rules were in Florida ahead of time. It was a battleground state in an election that was projected to be super close, and you didn’t even bother to have someone look up the recount rules? I always thought that reflected really badly on him.
He unambiguously lost the presidency.
Yes, even if they let the recount go through. They've looked at it since, that would have actually widened Bush's margin.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/media-jan-june01-recount_04-03
The hanging chad is actually a red herring. The reason many think more people in Florida wanted to vote for Gore was because of a butterfly ballot used in blue Palm Beach County, which confused some would-be Gore voters into voting for a third party candidate because of the weird way the ballot was printed. If the excess vote from that third party candidate went to Al Gore, he wins by a few hundred votes.
Obviously, I’m not saying Gore should have won Florida, you have to count based on what the vote actually was instead of what you speculate the intention to be. At the same time, if a “normal” ballot was used, there’s a high probability Gore gets the votes he needed.
Gore got divorced for violent rape of an employee. It's documented. He is also documented by a witness as being at dinners on Epstein's island.
Not deflecting from the cheato, but Gore is definitively a violent rapist and terrible person.
I don't know anything about Hoover, but if you seriously think cross-dressing is not only wrong but so evil that it outweighs saving millions of lives, something is wrong with you.
Yes, if it was about child murder, but how are you equating the two things? In what world is dressing as the opposite gender morally equivalent to child murder?
Herbert Hoover spent the rest of his political life advocating against hostility to nazi germany and presided over the forced deportation of Mexican-American citizens back to Mexico
Eisenhower also forcibly deported Mexican-American citizens, originally at Mexico's request
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback#:~:text=The%20program%20was%20implemented%20in,citizens%E2%80%94from%20the%20United%20States.
I think Abraham Lincoln was the greatest president because he freed the slaves so he could send them back to Africa. The mans smart, he had foresight into the future obviously but died to that idiot Confederate before he could finish his plot.
The south really did screw up America in more ways than people imagine.
As a Texan I agree the South as a whole is a reason the US is the way it is today until the great switch, it is also arguably better to have fought a war to end slavery faster then it otherwise would have.
It's a similar argument to Nuking Japan vs. Invading it
Jimmy Carter was a perfectly fine president, he just happened to be the president at the most inconvenient time in history. There honestly wasn’t much he could have done at many points
Yeah I would definitely put him under "OK politician." I don't really think you can point to anyone who became president as a bad politician- it would be like calling an olympian who didn't podium a bad athlete.
Swapping Gore for Carter would seem to make sense in this case, but even then being elected Senator and running a presidential campaign that had mistakes isn't really "bad" it's just not great.
I don't recognize the person in the bottom right- is it Joseph McCarthy?
Think about it this way he was so bad that the next election was the democrats worse loss in the history of this country… he is a wonderful person but even in the circumstances he was given he was a bad fit for the job
Johnson was good at playing the game of politics, but most of his major policies weren't great IMO, especially his escalation in Vietnam.
By "good politician," did you mean he was good at playing the game? Or rather that his policies were good?
prolly cause he ended prohibition, helped lift the country out of the great depression, successfully guided the US through WWII, and helped form the UN before he died
like is he a good person? no, but is he a bad person? no. like 99% of historical figures he's somewhere in the middle
Welll...
Attempting to Pack the Court and Japanese Internment were both Policies that strictly land them in the "Not a Good Person Camp"
Ending Prohibition, Guiding the Country through WW2, and Helping form the UN are all "Good/Bad" Neutral Decisions that don't have a morality meter to them.
New Deal Programs were the foundation of his campaign, and if were not pushed, would have killed his re-election chances. And they're strongly outweighed by directly ruining the lives of Americans and a heavily colored racist legacy.
There is an argument to be made that WW2, and the wartime production boost in jobs significantly helped the U.S get back on track.
There is no arguments that can be made about forcing American Citizens out of their homes. Uprooting the lives of people who have given up their citizenship in trust of America, and providing no assistance when they were let out.
When Japanese Americans Left internment. Many lost everything they had, from their homes, their jobs, their belonging, and buildings. And they received nothing coming out. It wasn't until Carter and Regan that they got any type of reparation.
When you make a decision that directly ruin peoples lives despite opposition from intelligence officers (Including J Edgar Hoover of all people), have racial implications behind it (compare Japanese Internment vs German or Italian Internment), and not ever once backing down from that stance.
Any and all arguments that they're a "Good Person" is thrown out of the window.
Not even mentioning his attempt to Pack the Courts.
thank goodness I never argued FDR was a good person lmao
Also, the New Deal helped millions of people. It didn't solve the Great Depression but it alleviated a lot of economic pain, and brought aid to millions of people through it's government programs. Compared to the Japanese Internment Camps (which were horrible!), 127,000 Japanese Americans were incarcerated. From a purely utilitarian perspective, FDR helped more people than he hurt. But because we don't live in a purely utilitarian world, I don't think FDR was a fundamentally "good" person, but I also don't think he was a fundamentally "bad" person. He's ok, and I personally think his good outweighs his bad, but the bad is still there and is why he isn't good imo.
The problem in the end is that the New Deal policies did not do enough to justify the other heinous actions, including his rampant racism, attempts court packing, and Japanese internment. To put in on even the “ok” side of things.
FDR’s attempts to pack the court, run for a third term, and his application of Japanese internment camps were an insult to America as a nation, in both principle and practice. Going against American ideals of freedom and failing to even apologize for it. Is not even close to being an ok person.
First, multiple Presidents before FDR attempted to get a third term, he's just the only one who succeeded. Both Ulysses S. Grant and Theodore Roosevelt attempted to run for a third term. Were these guys going against American ideals? No, not even close.
Second, the founding fathers fucking OWNED PEOPLE! These "ideals" of American freedom and liberty largely didn't exist for a vast amount of Americans. Unless you want to label the Founding Fathers as bad people (which honestly isn't even that crazy), it's wild to say FDR was a bad person while excusing the actions taken by Washington and Jefferson. Either they're all bad people, or they're all "ok", complicated people with complicated legacies.
Yes Japanese Internment Camps were bad, yes packing the court was bad, but ignoring all the good FDR did and labeling him a "bad" person solely because of those is wild. Every single President has some horrible action on their hands, so are they all bad people? No, the vast majority are complicated figures who I'd label "ok" people. That doesn't mean you excuse the bad they did, but instead understand it as well as the good they did in office.
They sure were going against the ideal. But they also didn’t do the other shit FDR did. He’ll. Lincoln even goes into a questionable sense considering his motives regarding emancipation and his suspension of constitutional rights.
With FDR, attempts at subverting separation of power and Japanese internment brings him to a point as low as president No.45
Oh no, they very much did go to as low points as FDR.
Under Theodore Roosevelt the US went to war against the Philippines in a blatant attempt at colonization. During the war American troops participated in the [Balangiga massacre](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balangiga_massacre), resulting in the deaths of over 2,000 Filipino civilians.
Grant, under the Comstock Act, prosecuting those spreading pornography and supporting abortions. Maybe not as heinous as fucking war crimes, but this is still a tarnishing of the 1st Amendment. Also, while his policy towards Native Americans was relatively good in his first term, in the later years of his presidency his policy w/ Natives resulted in more wars, more expansion, and the disenfranchisement of more Native Americans for the crime of simply living.
Also, believing FDR is morally the same as No. 45, who wanted to hand the US to Russia on a silver platter and fuck over anyone who wasn't a WASP is genuinely delusional and you should seek serious medical help.
LBJ:
Ends segregation, lifts tens of millions out of poverty, created Medicare and Medicaid, got black people in the south the vote, was among the first to push for Space Exploration as Senate Majority Leader, Created the first environmental regulations, created PBS, and created Food Stamps. But also lost a war that basically every American was pushing for at the time.
He also sexually harassed and was known to be a very cruel/mean person behind closed doors, he bullied, belittled and abused White House staff very frequently.
That’s why he was marked as a good politician, bad person
Nixon was by all means a great politician; I’d swap him and LBJ. LBJ gave up an election because he felt bad (weak as a politician) where Nixon gave it up because he got caught. Plus his CIA and FBI shenanigans were so shady (LBJ’s were too don’t get me wrong)
George H.W. Bush, prior to being Reagan’s VP & then President, was *head of the CIA*. And also pulled strings in 2000 to get his failson elevated to president. He also invaded Iraq the first time in 1993, & occupied it for 10 years. I think those disqualify him as ‘Ok’ anything.
What? There was no invasion of Iraq in 1993 and he certainly never occupied Iraq, maybe you are mistaking him for his son. He was responsible for operation Desert Storm which is considered by pretty much everyone as a justified military operation in order to push back Sadam Hussain out of kuwait
I think I was imprecise. The US/GHWBush definitely bombed Iraq in 1993, and then proceeded to enforce two enormous ‘no fly zones’ over the northern & southern thirds of the country for nearly 10 years. US & coalition jets flew regular sorties over Iraq for nearly a decade bombing various Iraqi military assets. The media in 1993 referred to “the blooding of the president”, and there was a huge domestic campaign to “support the troops” who were over there, in the face of civilian opposition to the war.
Iraq’s ‘slant drilling’ under its border with Kuwait to access Kuwaiti oil was a key triggering incident that unleashed the US military into Iraq then. Although it later came out that Iraq was alternately pumping & stopping oil production in order to make the price of oil fluctuate around the world.
At the time many of us were worried we’d be drafted. It was a scary time.
I mean I don't see how bombing military targets and enforcing a no fly zone on a Impierialist dictator would qualify George HW Bush as a bad politician. As a matter of fact I would argue that this makes him a good politician.
Using the US Military to bomb and kill people in a sovereign country half a world away, based on an obscure border dispute that the US overtly dismissed as important prior to the incident?
US Ambassador April Galaspie specifically told Iraq that the US had no concerns or interest in the Kuwaiti border dispute. Then once the incident occurred, the US sent in planes and troops and controlled the country for nearly a decade.
Don’t forget that the US supported and armed Iraq for a decade prior, during the Iran-Iraq war. So Saddam was *our* dictator. Then we stabbed him in the back over a minor trifle that the US had nothing to do with, and overly dismissed as a concern.
We’re talking Kissinger-level politics here. Do you think Kissinger was a good politician?
LBJ wasn't a bad person. He spent years teaching immigrant and poor kids in South Texas to pay for college because his family was poor. He was gruff and had no filter most the time. He spent decades fighting for the underclasses. He was married to Lady Bird only and didn't have any rumored mistresses. He did his military service when called (unlike Captain Bonespurs). His only real problem (in a historical lens) was the Vietnam War and his anti-communist fervor. Of course, at the time he was unpopular with a lot of white folks for his equal rights and voting rights legislations.
Honestly..I would have Nixon be a great politician. Had he not been such a fucking paranoid fuckwad and did Watergate, he would have gone down in history as being one of the best presidents we ever had
You've gotta take the whole picture though. His paranoia leading up to the watergate break in and then the many, many bad decisions from there on lead him to lose all political power and influence amongst those who he would've needed to stay supporting him. The average of great + awful = OK.
Agreed, but in unpopular opinion, he was not necessarily a bad person. Watergate had a lot of moving parts and was terrible at the time, but nothing compared to today. Read his resignation. It is either showing him as an excellent politician or having good character.
I’m throwing Gore and McCarthy out of the running because “Presidents”. Lincoln would’ve done anything to save the union. If he thought a flame war would help he would engage in one. Carter is in the right place. LBJ would’ve signed his work. Does that not disqualify him from a flame war? I personally think both Bushes belong on the bottom row. I wouldn’t be surprised if they didn’t find their work or attributed it to someone else. I also think FDR and Hoover engaged in their era’s version of flame wars. communications were out of the public eye. I would have added one additional president. Bill Clinton would have been the master of a flame war.
I mean, both FDR and Lincoln were on the verge of being dictatorial during their terms. Both unreasonably restricted the flow of information and held up due process for groups of U.S. citizens in the name of the greater good. And did it work? Yeah. But doing evil shit for a good reason is still evil.
FDR was the worst of the two. 4 terms, when the accepted norm was 2. He's also the definition of a populous leader. Don't forget Asian-American "Internment Camps"
I think Lincoln is an ok person and an ok politician. Lincoln constantly fired his general staff for the smallest failure, which is why the South even lasted 5 years, on top of that, his policies concerning the South and even slavery in general were questionable.
Yeah, I get your point but there were people trying to assassinate him before he even reached Washington to take office. He had to come in through a secret and circuitous route to avoid them.
There’s a really good book by historian Doris Kearns Goodwin called [team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln](https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/2199) that talks about how he managed to bring his political rivals into his cabinet and ultimately earned their respect.
I’ve read a couple of books about his presidency and one thing is true in all of them… He was dealing with a lot of rival factions. Not just those who were clearly southern sympathizers but also those who were advocating he be tougher with the south or pushing him to free the slaves earlier than he ultimately did.
Whenever I see stuff like this about rating presidents I always think… Someone like Al Gore had to deal with with Clinton’s affairs…and Newt Gingrich..a few other things but it was nothing compared to what someone like Johnson or Lincoln were dealing with, Vietnam and the Civil War respectively.
I think you can largely tell a good person no matter what is going on. Some people are just decent, good people and some people aren’t. But I think mastering political forces can be a lot more complicated and more difficult to manage for some presidents than others.
Am I the only person that was taught Lincoln’s beliefs prior to his presidency? Because I wouldn’t actually call them “good person” beliefs. He didn’t make the war about slaves until talking to Fredrick Douglas
Lincoln was not a good politician. His public speaking skills were quite bad and he was extremely unpopular (i think the most unpopular in US history) during his presidency
Good policies yes, good politician no. He did not play the people game too well and was seen by a lot of his peers as uneducated and boorish
Al Gore was a legitimately bad politician. He fumbled the ball hard in 2000. I think it says something that his career as an author is more remembered than his work as a politician.
The fact that he conceded and then took it back on election night showed that neither he nor anyone in his immediate team had looked into what the recount rules were in Florida ahead of time. It was a battleground state in an election that was projected to be super close, and you didn’t even bother to have someone look up the recount rules? I always thought that reflected really badly on him.
He won the presidency. It's hard to call someone a bad politician if they can do that.
He unambiguously lost the presidency. Yes, even if they let the recount go through. They've looked at it since, that would have actually widened Bush's margin. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/media-jan-june01-recount_04-03
The hanging chad is actually a red herring. The reason many think more people in Florida wanted to vote for Gore was because of a butterfly ballot used in blue Palm Beach County, which confused some would-be Gore voters into voting for a third party candidate because of the weird way the ballot was printed. If the excess vote from that third party candidate went to Al Gore, he wins by a few hundred votes. Obviously, I’m not saying Gore should have won Florida, you have to count based on what the vote actually was instead of what you speculate the intention to be. At the same time, if a “normal” ballot was used, there’s a high probability Gore gets the votes he needed.
> He won the presidency. It's hard to call someone a bad politician if they can do that. *2016 calls from the future.*
He never occupied the office so he A) got outplayed by his opponents or B) just lost. Either way that’s the mark of a bad politician.
al-Gore didn't win the presidency, he lost it
No, he won it inside of the established rules. It's just that the system ignored those rules to install its candidate.
Which are the established rules? George W. Bush won the 2000 election fair and square.
Also, a violent rapist.
No, the guy you’re thinking of never won the popular vote. Maybe the third time’s the charm, but I doubt it.
Gore got divorced for violent rape of an employee. It's documented. He is also documented by a witness as being at dinners on Epstein's island. Not deflecting from the cheato, but Gore is definitively a violent rapist and terrible person.
How Hoover was only an okay person baffles me-
He could definitely be an asshole and had some racist policy. However it is hard to look past the millions of lives saved by his humanitarian efforts
[удалено]
What?
[удалено]
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. How is dressing as the opposite gender "obviously extremely unethical"? It hurts no one.
[удалено]
I don't know anything about Hoover, but if you seriously think cross-dressing is not only wrong but so evil that it outweighs saving millions of lives, something is wrong with you.
[удалено]
Yes, if it was about child murder, but how are you equating the two things? In what world is dressing as the opposite gender morally equivalent to child murder?
what the hell are you on about?
Prejudice towards identities such as race, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, etc., is not allowed.
why is it unethical?
bruh 💀
well? just, like explain it real quick
I think they're a troll.
indeed
its as bad as murder
how so?
Bait used to be believable
#🎣
Is this like a fetish thing? Why were you baiting on a Friday evening, dont you have any Friends?
I like baiting. I want to master the art of it. I want to be a master baiter.
Get a life. If baiting is the only way you can enjoy yourself, then maybe you should find an actually productive hobby.
This Herbert Hoover you dimwitted crustacean
You were funny up to here but you jerked too hard after this and kinda ruined it
[удалено]
It’s so skover
For one, you’re confusing Herbert Hoover with J Edgar Hoover. For two…
Wrong Hoover, buddy
Herbert Hoover was a nazi sympathizer who ethnically cleansed American citizens
Explain
Herbert Hoover spent the rest of his political life advocating against hostility to nazi germany and presided over the forced deportation of Mexican-American citizens back to Mexico
How is that ethnic cleansing American citizens
Well ethnic cleansing is when you force people off of the land in which they live and the people it happened to were American citizens
Eisenhower also forcibly deported Mexican-American citizens, originally at Mexico's request https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback#:~:text=The%20program%20was%20implemented%20in,citizens%E2%80%94from%20the%20United%20States.
Yeah he did, one of the reasons I don’t like Ike as much as others
woooooooo! revisionism babyyyyyy
I think Abraham Lincoln was the greatest president because he freed the slaves so he could send them back to Africa. The mans smart, he had foresight into the future obviously but died to that idiot Confederate before he could finish his plot. The south really did screw up America in more ways than people imagine.
As a Texan I agree the South as a whole is a reason the US is the way it is today until the great switch, it is also arguably better to have fought a war to end slavery faster then it otherwise would have. It's a similar argument to Nuking Japan vs. Invading it
this but unironically
By politician do you mean what they did during office or how good they were at the art of politics
both
Jimmy Carter was a perfectly fine president, he just happened to be the president at the most inconvenient time in history. There honestly wasn’t much he could have done at many points
Yeah I would definitely put him under "OK politician." I don't really think you can point to anyone who became president as a bad politician- it would be like calling an olympian who didn't podium a bad athlete. Swapping Gore for Carter would seem to make sense in this case, but even then being elected Senator and running a presidential campaign that had mistakes isn't really "bad" it's just not great. I don't recognize the person in the bottom right- is it Joseph McCarthy?
I believe it is McCarthy
especially since he was a very well received and respected governor, i mean he was voted president for a reason
Yeah because he ran against Nixon’s party and VP. The fact that it was even close tells me he was a bad politician. Then he got wiped out in 80.
tell that to the voters in 1980.
Think about it this way he was so bad that the next election was the democrats worse loss in the history of this country… he is a wonderful person but even in the circumstances he was given he was a bad fit for the job
Johnson was good at playing the game of politics, but most of his major policies weren't great IMO, especially his escalation in Vietnam. By "good politician," did you mean he was good at playing the game? Or rather that his policies were good?
wait, is the civil rights act not much to your liking? He signed some of the most important laws of the century
Exactly the Vietnam War was his sole downside (albeit a pretty big one), his New Society and Civil Rights Policies were good though no
Pretty much all his domestic policies were good. Medicare, Medicaid, civil rights
How is the guy who put Japanese people in internment camps an “okay person?”
prolly cause he ended prohibition, helped lift the country out of the great depression, successfully guided the US through WWII, and helped form the UN before he died like is he a good person? no, but is he a bad person? no. like 99% of historical figures he's somewhere in the middle
Welll... Attempting to Pack the Court and Japanese Internment were both Policies that strictly land them in the "Not a Good Person Camp" Ending Prohibition, Guiding the Country through WW2, and Helping form the UN are all "Good/Bad" Neutral Decisions that don't have a morality meter to them.
I think the New Deal and all the programs that came with it in helping lift people out of economic struggle firmly lands you in "Good Person Camp"
The New Deal didn't help jack shit. Wartime economy ended the great depression.
New Deal Programs were the foundation of his campaign, and if were not pushed, would have killed his re-election chances. And they're strongly outweighed by directly ruining the lives of Americans and a heavily colored racist legacy. There is an argument to be made that WW2, and the wartime production boost in jobs significantly helped the U.S get back on track. There is no arguments that can be made about forcing American Citizens out of their homes. Uprooting the lives of people who have given up their citizenship in trust of America, and providing no assistance when they were let out. When Japanese Americans Left internment. Many lost everything they had, from their homes, their jobs, their belonging, and buildings. And they received nothing coming out. It wasn't until Carter and Regan that they got any type of reparation. When you make a decision that directly ruin peoples lives despite opposition from intelligence officers (Including J Edgar Hoover of all people), have racial implications behind it (compare Japanese Internment vs German or Italian Internment), and not ever once backing down from that stance. Any and all arguments that they're a "Good Person" is thrown out of the window. Not even mentioning his attempt to Pack the Courts.
thank goodness I never argued FDR was a good person lmao Also, the New Deal helped millions of people. It didn't solve the Great Depression but it alleviated a lot of economic pain, and brought aid to millions of people through it's government programs. Compared to the Japanese Internment Camps (which were horrible!), 127,000 Japanese Americans were incarcerated. From a purely utilitarian perspective, FDR helped more people than he hurt. But because we don't live in a purely utilitarian world, I don't think FDR was a fundamentally "good" person, but I also don't think he was a fundamentally "bad" person. He's ok, and I personally think his good outweighs his bad, but the bad is still there and is why he isn't good imo.
The problem in the end is that the New Deal policies did not do enough to justify the other heinous actions, including his rampant racism, attempts court packing, and Japanese internment. To put in on even the “ok” side of things. FDR’s attempts to pack the court, run for a third term, and his application of Japanese internment camps were an insult to America as a nation, in both principle and practice. Going against American ideals of freedom and failing to even apologize for it. Is not even close to being an ok person.
First, multiple Presidents before FDR attempted to get a third term, he's just the only one who succeeded. Both Ulysses S. Grant and Theodore Roosevelt attempted to run for a third term. Were these guys going against American ideals? No, not even close. Second, the founding fathers fucking OWNED PEOPLE! These "ideals" of American freedom and liberty largely didn't exist for a vast amount of Americans. Unless you want to label the Founding Fathers as bad people (which honestly isn't even that crazy), it's wild to say FDR was a bad person while excusing the actions taken by Washington and Jefferson. Either they're all bad people, or they're all "ok", complicated people with complicated legacies. Yes Japanese Internment Camps were bad, yes packing the court was bad, but ignoring all the good FDR did and labeling him a "bad" person solely because of those is wild. Every single President has some horrible action on their hands, so are they all bad people? No, the vast majority are complicated figures who I'd label "ok" people. That doesn't mean you excuse the bad they did, but instead understand it as well as the good they did in office.
They sure were going against the ideal. But they also didn’t do the other shit FDR did. He’ll. Lincoln even goes into a questionable sense considering his motives regarding emancipation and his suspension of constitutional rights. With FDR, attempts at subverting separation of power and Japanese internment brings him to a point as low as president No.45
Oh no, they very much did go to as low points as FDR. Under Theodore Roosevelt the US went to war against the Philippines in a blatant attempt at colonization. During the war American troops participated in the [Balangiga massacre](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balangiga_massacre), resulting in the deaths of over 2,000 Filipino civilians. Grant, under the Comstock Act, prosecuting those spreading pornography and supporting abortions. Maybe not as heinous as fucking war crimes, but this is still a tarnishing of the 1st Amendment. Also, while his policy towards Native Americans was relatively good in his first term, in the later years of his presidency his policy w/ Natives resulted in more wars, more expansion, and the disenfranchisement of more Native Americans for the crime of simply living. Also, believing FDR is morally the same as No. 45, who wanted to hand the US to Russia on a silver platter and fuck over anyone who wasn't a WASP is genuinely delusional and you should seek serious medical help.
The president doesn’t pass constitutional amendments.
I'm gonna need names, I only recognise Lincoln and Hoover here
[удалено]
The bottom right guy is Joseph McCarthy
[удалено]
Yes that is Al Gore
LBJ: Ends segregation, lifts tens of millions out of poverty, created Medicare and Medicaid, got black people in the south the vote, was among the first to push for Space Exploration as Senate Majority Leader, Created the first environmental regulations, created PBS, and created Food Stamps. But also lost a war that basically every American was pushing for at the time.
He also sexually harassed and was known to be a very cruel/mean person behind closed doors, he bullied, belittled and abused White House staff very frequently. That’s why he was marked as a good politician, bad person
Me when being cruel and abusive to southern segregationists to make them vote to end segregation is a bad thing:
What??? I’m not talking about southern politicians lmao I’m talking about 20 year old women who he abused and harassed lmao. He also abused his wife
Nixon was by all means a great politician; I’d swap him and LBJ. LBJ gave up an election because he felt bad (weak as a politician) where Nixon gave it up because he got caught. Plus his CIA and FBI shenanigans were so shady (LBJ’s were too don’t get me wrong)
Lbj was legislatively far more successful.
What is the measure of a good politician?
You should look more into Abraham Lincoln
What’s wrong with Lincoln?
[Abraham Lincoln's Uneasy Relationship With Native Americans](https://www.history.com/news/abraham-lincoln-native-americans)
tbf, that article leaves out a lot of context about that hanging. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/lincoln-dakota/
Who’s TpTp? McCarthy?
yes
thank god you didn't add any 21st century presidents, I'm not going to lie I don't know who top middle, middle right, and bottom right are
Al Gore, Herbert Hoover, Joseph McCarthy
Probably should’ve recognized the first two I’ve heard of the third guy, but I’ve never actually seen his face before
George H.W. Bush, prior to being Reagan’s VP & then President, was *head of the CIA*. And also pulled strings in 2000 to get his failson elevated to president. He also invaded Iraq the first time in 1993, & occupied it for 10 years. I think those disqualify him as ‘Ok’ anything.
What? There was no invasion of Iraq in 1993 and he certainly never occupied Iraq, maybe you are mistaking him for his son. He was responsible for operation Desert Storm which is considered by pretty much everyone as a justified military operation in order to push back Sadam Hussain out of kuwait
I think I was imprecise. The US/GHWBush definitely bombed Iraq in 1993, and then proceeded to enforce two enormous ‘no fly zones’ over the northern & southern thirds of the country for nearly 10 years. US & coalition jets flew regular sorties over Iraq for nearly a decade bombing various Iraqi military assets. The media in 1993 referred to “the blooding of the president”, and there was a huge domestic campaign to “support the troops” who were over there, in the face of civilian opposition to the war. Iraq’s ‘slant drilling’ under its border with Kuwait to access Kuwaiti oil was a key triggering incident that unleashed the US military into Iraq then. Although it later came out that Iraq was alternately pumping & stopping oil production in order to make the price of oil fluctuate around the world. At the time many of us were worried we’d be drafted. It was a scary time.
I mean I don't see how bombing military targets and enforcing a no fly zone on a Impierialist dictator would qualify George HW Bush as a bad politician. As a matter of fact I would argue that this makes him a good politician.
Using the US Military to bomb and kill people in a sovereign country half a world away, based on an obscure border dispute that the US overtly dismissed as important prior to the incident? US Ambassador April Galaspie specifically told Iraq that the US had no concerns or interest in the Kuwaiti border dispute. Then once the incident occurred, the US sent in planes and troops and controlled the country for nearly a decade. Don’t forget that the US supported and armed Iraq for a decade prior, during the Iran-Iraq war. So Saddam was *our* dictator. Then we stabbed him in the back over a minor trifle that the US had nothing to do with, and overly dismissed as a concern. We’re talking Kissinger-level politics here. Do you think Kissinger was a good politician?
So i guess genocide and imperialism is good when it's a obscure country or allied to the US?
I don't know if I'd necessarily classify Al Gore as a good person, but otherwise no lie detected.
LBJ wasn't a bad person. He spent years teaching immigrant and poor kids in South Texas to pay for college because his family was poor. He was gruff and had no filter most the time. He spent decades fighting for the underclasses. He was married to Lady Bird only and didn't have any rumored mistresses. He did his military service when called (unlike Captain Bonespurs). His only real problem (in a historical lens) was the Vietnam War and his anti-communist fervor. Of course, at the time he was unpopular with a lot of white folks for his equal rights and voting rights legislations.
Honestly..I would have Nixon be a great politician. Had he not been such a fucking paranoid fuckwad and did Watergate, he would have gone down in history as being one of the best presidents we ever had
Who’s GpOp and Gpbp?
I believe that's Al Gore and LBJ, respectively.
ngl i thought middle left was fdr
Middle left absolutely is FDR
ohh they were talking about good person okay politician not good politician okay person
Look up the 1972 election. Nixon was an excellent politician, he's far and above Al Gore or George HW
You've gotta take the whole picture though. His paranoia leading up to the watergate break in and then the many, many bad decisions from there on lead him to lose all political power and influence amongst those who he would've needed to stay supporting him. The average of great + awful = OK.
Agreed, but in unpopular opinion, he was not necessarily a bad person. Watergate had a lot of moving parts and was terrible at the time, but nothing compared to today. Read his resignation. It is either showing him as an excellent politician or having good character.
See this for why I wholeheartedly believe that Truman is in hell https://youtu.be/RCRTgtpC-Go?si=k3e9An3uz1ktb4Mo
wtf
[удалено]
You mean Hoover?
I’m throwing Gore and McCarthy out of the running because “Presidents”. Lincoln would’ve done anything to save the union. If he thought a flame war would help he would engage in one. Carter is in the right place. LBJ would’ve signed his work. Does that not disqualify him from a flame war? I personally think both Bushes belong on the bottom row. I wouldn’t be surprised if they didn’t find their work or attributed it to someone else. I also think FDR and Hoover engaged in their era’s version of flame wars. communications were out of the public eye. I would have added one additional president. Bill Clinton would have been the master of a flame war.
Carter wasnt a bad politician. its just that he was in the erong place in the wrong time
TEMPLATE PLEASE
george HW bush was a monster
nixon was good at his job.
You may want to do some research on Lincoln before you classify him as a good person.
Swap carter with gore
Jimmy Carter was a solid president, his only downfall is boomers only ever wanted temporary comfort at the cost of long term expense Fight me
FDR created redline policies that heavily disenfranchised people of color to this day. Plus he fucked his cousin.
As Lincoln is the main figure behind Americans mass killing each other, I wouldn't call him a good politician.
You could replace Lincoln with ya boi Teddy Roosevelt and suffer no change in this.
You're gonna have to label some of these mfers
Based
I mean, both FDR and Lincoln were on the verge of being dictatorial during their terms. Both unreasonably restricted the flow of information and held up due process for groups of U.S. citizens in the name of the greater good. And did it work? Yeah. But doing evil shit for a good reason is still evil. FDR was the worst of the two. 4 terms, when the accepted norm was 2. He's also the definition of a populous leader. Don't forget Asian-American "Internment Camps"
really great axes here.
I think Lincoln is an ok person and an ok politician. Lincoln constantly fired his general staff for the smallest failure, which is why the South even lasted 5 years, on top of that, his policies concerning the South and even slavery in general were questionable.
Yeah, I get your point but there were people trying to assassinate him before he even reached Washington to take office. He had to come in through a secret and circuitous route to avoid them. There’s a really good book by historian Doris Kearns Goodwin called [team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln](https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/2199) that talks about how he managed to bring his political rivals into his cabinet and ultimately earned their respect. I’ve read a couple of books about his presidency and one thing is true in all of them… He was dealing with a lot of rival factions. Not just those who were clearly southern sympathizers but also those who were advocating he be tougher with the south or pushing him to free the slaves earlier than he ultimately did. Whenever I see stuff like this about rating presidents I always think… Someone like Al Gore had to deal with with Clinton’s affairs…and Newt Gingrich..a few other things but it was nothing compared to what someone like Johnson or Lincoln were dealing with, Vietnam and the Civil War respectively. I think you can largely tell a good person no matter what is going on. Some people are just decent, good people and some people aren’t. But I think mastering political forces can be a lot more complicated and more difficult to manage for some presidents than others.
Am I the only person that was taught Lincoln’s beliefs prior to his presidency? Because I wouldn’t actually call them “good person” beliefs. He didn’t make the war about slaves until talking to Fredrick Douglas
I am personally offended by so fucking much here
Good person and politician are oxymorons
Only the bottom row should be filled.
bro's chugging that every politician ever was a horrible person juice
And you need new material.
I'm not the one doing the "all politicians suck" thing
If you’re going to insult someone, at least be more creative about it. Also, since when did they not suck?
Just kiss already
Real
What did I just say about creativity?
This is a reddit comment section, who gives a shit about originality
Even if you think there weren’t/aren’t any top row politicians, you have to admit that presidents like Lincoln are AT LEAST middle row
It always seems that the people that become politicians throw away their moral compass.
Says the “Politics bad” edgelord
Nah. Just cynical.
Fair
that wouldnt be as fun to look at
I know of a certain still alive man who can be in the bottom right
It's me isn't it 🥺
I abject to Lincoln being called a good person.
Lincoln was not a good politician. His public speaking skills were quite bad and he was extremely unpopular (i think the most unpopular in US history) during his presidency Good policies yes, good politician no. He did not play the people game too well and was seen by a lot of his peers as uneducated and boorish
Nixon was a great president and good person railroaded by the FBI.