The WORST President Since WWII

[houndawg]

Memories fade...


Still Reagan by a long shot

Reagan got the plurality for "Best President" in this poll. So apparently people do remember him. I agree with the poll results too. My memory hasn't faded at all in that regard. It's too bad the Republicans couldn't clone him or something because they sure as heck haven't been able to come up with another one like him.

Obama? He's a snarky little punk. And when I use the word "little" I'm not talking about his physical size. I'm talking about his stature. The fact that he's President of the United States is an absolute disgrace that calls the quality of the American People into serious question. A majority of the American people actually voted for that POS. Twice.

Obama, thankfully, will pass. But we've got the problem of having a population of people that would elect somebody like that.

It has. It really has.

Biggest spender of them all at the time.

[GannonFan]

We tend for forget that during Reagan's presidency that the democrats controlled the house of representatives during his 8 year term and the senate for the last 4 ( I think) . Reagan did things that people long for today. Worked with the other side and compromised. You can argue all day whether he was good or bad but what we do know is that things got done during the Reagan presidency that was supported by enough democrats to make them happen. Blame or congratulate whichever side you want.

My point is that he is revered as some sort of small government champion of cutting spending when he was anything but.

Who really champions Reagan as a champion of cutting spending? I think you're making that up to then have an angle to criticize him. He saw a way to hasten the end of the Cold War (of which he played a part to end - he wasn't the sole reason why it ended like some Repubs like to think so and he wasn't a minor player in ending it like Dems like to pretend he was) and he did so by outspending the Russians into dissolution. And the spending wasn't catostrophic for us - after the economic policies of the first Bush and Clinton, we had more than recovered. If that's your biggest criticism of Reagan then it doesn't seem terribly bad at all.

[kalm]

So if we can blame the democrats for Reagan's spending and amnesty, can we blame the revolutionary republicans for Clinton signing Graham-Leach-Bliley and the CFMA? Those two pieces of legislation have fucked the economy as much as anything else has. BTW, Reagan's Central Valley ag base loved the amnesty. Just sayin'.

Reagan was a master salesman and that's about it. He presided over the fall of the USSR as much as won the cold war. The war on drugs escalated under his presidency coinciding with the brilliant Nancy slogan of "Just say no". He traded with terrorist regimes, along with Charlie Wilson, armed "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan, and supported repressive groups in Latin America.

But the biggest daggers were of course reaganomics and the meme that government is the enemy. Conks have been riding these horses ever since and more than a few donks have jumped on board once they realized that union support was being outpaced by corporate support. Today, both are the parties of big business, low taxes, financial deregulation, corporatism, crony capitalism, and top down economics in general.

Reagan, Obama, W…all pretty fucking bad.

[bluehenbillk]

The poll was conducted by Quinnipiac I believe which is a heavily slanted GOP/conservative service so take what you want out of that.

Is Obama a bad President? Sure, it's hard to argue otherwise. Six years in & he still seems to be learning on the job & has next to no people skills when it comes to crossing the aisle, something he no longer even shows interest in.

Not defending Obama here but it is fair to point out that Congress during Obama has been beyond pathetic - both parties. The House is the worst - full mostly of losers from both parties who are there only because they won virtually unopposed gerrymandered districts & disenfranchised voters won't change unless they are at extremes. It's hard to fault Obama with the executive actions when you witness the lack of action Congress is able to manufacture. Has there been a modern Congress that has ever done less.

The USA functions despite what occurs in the District of Columbia.

[kalm]

The poll was conducted by Quinnipiac I believe which is a heavily slanted GOP/conservative service so take what you want out of that.

Is Obama a bad President? Sure, it's hard to argue otherwise. Six years in & he still seems to be learning on the job & has next to no people skills when it comes to crossing the aisle, something he no longer even shows interest in.

Not defending Obama here but it is fair to point out that Congress during Obama has been beyond pathetic - both parties. The House is the worst - full mostly of losers from both parties who are there only because they won virtually unopposed gerrymandered districts & disenfranchised voters won't change unless they are at extremes. It's hard to fault Obama with the executive actions when you witness the lack of action Congress is able to manufacture. Has there been a modern Congress that has ever done less.

The USA functions despite what occurs in the District of Columbia.

Good post Bilkie!

[Baldy]

So if we can blame the democrats for Reagan's spending and amnesty, can we blame the revolutionary republicans for Clinton signing Graham-Leach-Bliley and the CFMA? Those two pieces of legislation have fucked the economy as much as anything else has. BTW, Reagan's Central Valley ag base loved the amnesty. Just sayin'.

Reagan was a master salesman and that's about it. He presided over the fall of the USSR as much as won the cold war. The war on drugs escalated under his presidency coinciding with the brilliant Nancy slogan of "Just say no". He traded with terrorist regimes, along with Charlie Wilson, armed "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan, and supported repressive groups in Latin America.

But the biggest daggers were of course reaganomics and the meme that government is the enemy. Conks have been riding these horses ever since and more than a few donks have jumped on board once they realized that union support was being outpaced by corporate support. Today, both are the parties of big business, low taxes, financial deregulation, corporatism, crony capitalism, and top down economics in general.

Reagan, Obama, W…all pretty fucking bad.

Same 'ol kalm, same 'ol revisionist history talking points from the CAP.

Please tell the class kalm, who was the last great 'Merican president we should be emulating right now?

[Baldy]

The poll was conducted by Quinnipiac I believe which is a heavily slanted GOP/conservative service so take what you want out of that.

Is Obama a bad President? Sure, it's hard to argue otherwise. Six years in & he still seems to be learning on the job & has next to no people skills when it comes to crossing the aisle, something he no longer even shows interest in.

Not defending Obama here but it is fair to point out that Congress during Obama has been beyond pathetic - both parties. The House is the worst - full mostly of losers from both parties who are there only because they won virtually unopposed gerrymandered districts & disenfranchised voters won't change unless they are at extremes. It's hard to fault Obama with the executive actions when you witness the lack of action Congress is able to manufacture. Has there been a modern Congress that has ever done less.

The USA functions despite what occurs in the District of Columbia.

Actually, Quinnipiac has a reputation as being one of the most respected, accurate, and non-partisan polling operations out there.

I share your opinion about Congress in general. The House has been God awful, but the Senate has got to be the worst non-functioning illiterate entities in government.
BUT still, as the SCOTUS has stated in far too many decisions lately, Congressional inaction is not an excuse for the president...any president to go on a scorched earth imperial power grabbing mission. In just the past two weeks, SCOTUS has found the Obama Regime in violation of the Separation of Powers clause, the 4th amendment, and the 1st amendment (and two of those decisions were unanimous). That has got to be some sort of record, and not a record to be proud about either.

We have had some God awful presidents in our short history, but history (even revisionist history) will not be kind to the POS occupying the White House now.

[Pwns]

What I take from this is that Americans are really, really polarized. It will only get worse as America becomes more diverse and more collectively ignorant.

I don't care for Obama but can't honestly say I think things would be a lot better with McCain or Romney.

[kalm]

So if we can blame the democrats for Reagan's spending and amnesty, can we blame the revolutionary republicans for Clinton signing Graham-Leach-Bliley and the CFMA? Those two pieces of legislation have fucked the economy as much as anything else has. BTW, Reagan's Central Valley ag base loved the amnesty. Just sayin'.

Reagan was a master salesman and that's about it. He presided over the fall of the USSR as much as won the cold war. The war on drugs escalated under his presidency coinciding with the brilliant Nancy slogan of "Just say no". He traded with terrorist regimes, along with Charlie Wilson, armed "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan, and supported repressive groups in Latin America.

But the biggest daggers were of course reaganomics and the meme that government is the enemy. Conks have been riding these horses ever since and more than a few donks have jumped on board once they realized that union support was being outpaced by corporate support. Today, both are the parties of big business, low taxes, financial deregulation, corporatism, crony capitalism, and top down economics in general.

Reagan, Obama, W…all pretty fucking bad.

Same 'ol kalm, same 'ol revisionist history talking points from the CAP.

Please tell the class kalm, who was the last great 'Merican president we should be emulating right now?

Chavez...duh!

[GannonFan]

What I take from this is that Americans are really, really polarized. It will only get worse as America becomes more diverse and more collectively ignorant.

I don't care for Obama but can't honestly say I think things would be a lot better with McCain or Romney.

Obama doesn't rate better simply because he might have been better than the boobs the GOP ran when they put McCain and Romney out there in successive elections. By that barometer, W would end up being a great President because at least we didn't have to suffer through Gore or Kerry.

Seriously, what a terrible choice of Presidents over the past 14 years: W, Gore, Kerry, Obama, McCain, Romney. Yuck.

[ASUG8]

What I take from this is that Americans are really, really polarized. It will only get worse as America becomes more diverse and more collectively ignorant.

I don't care for Obama but can't honestly say I think things would be a lot better with McCain or Romney.

I raised the question in another post a few weeks back, but would things be worse?

[GannonFan]

What I take from this is that Americans are really, really polarized. It will only get worse as America becomes more diverse and more collectively ignorant.

I don't care for Obama but can't honestly say I think things would be a lot better with McCain or Romney.

I raised the question in another post a few weeks back, but would things be worse?

Sort of agree with that. McCain's a bit of a whacko, so it's hard to tell what he would've done, and frankly, he's pretty ineffectual as a Senator (as Obama was as well) so he probably wouldn't have gotten much done either. But yes, it might have been worse under McCain. Romney not so much, though. He was more of a consensus builder guy so he might have been able to do something better than Obama. But still, if you can't put together a campaign to beat someone, I have to question whether you could put together a government and adminster effectively.

[Pwns]

Seriously, what a terrible choice of Presidents over the past 14 years: W, Gore, Kerry, Obama, McCain, Romney. Yuck.

To think people on this board scoffed at me circa 2008 for advocating voting third party.

[ASUG8]

I raised the question in another post a few weeks back, but would things be worse?

Sort of agree with that. McCain's a bit of a whacko, so it's hard to tell what he would've done, and frankly, he's pretty ineffectual as a Senator (as Obama was as well) so he probably wouldn't have gotten much done either. But yes, it might have been worse under McCain. Romney not so much, though. He was more of a consensus builder guy so he might have been able to do something better than Obama. But still, if you can't put together a campaign to beat someone, I have to question whether you could put together a government and adminster effectively.

I think you take away the 47% comment and we'd be in a Republican administration right now. Obama was on the ropes until he went on his divisive rampage to make Romney an elitist. Should be interesting to see how Clinton dodges that same issue in '16.

[Baldy]

Same 'ol kalm, same 'ol revisionist history talking points from the CAP.

Please tell the class kalm, who was the last great 'Merican president we should be emulating right now?

Chavez...duh!

Nice dodge.

[GannonFan]

Seriously, what a terrible choice of Presidents over the past 14 years: W, Gore, Kerry, Obama, McCain, Romney. Yuck.

To think people on this board scoffed at me circa 2008 for advocating voting third party.

Voting for Obama, like I did, was worth the risk IMO. He was dynamic enough and he could've done a lot more. Unfortunately, his inexperience crippled him in his first year or two and he let the supermajority in Congress dictate too much. He never properly addressed the economy and he made a lot of enemies, resulting in the remarkable flipping of the House to the Republicans in just two short years. And to say his foreign policy has been muddled is to be kind. But I still wouldn't have wanted to vote for someone else back in 2008, it was worth the risk IMO.

[CID1990]

To think people on this board scoffed at me circa 2008 for advocating voting third party.

Voting for Obama, like I did, was worth the risk IMO. He was dynamic enough and he could've done a lot more. Unfortunately, his inexperience crippled him in his first year or two and he let the supermajority in Congress dictate too much. He never properly addressed the economy and he made a lot of enemies, resulting in the remarkable flipping of the House to the Republicans in just two short years. And to say his foreign policy has been muddled is to be kind. But I still wouldn't have wanted to vote for someone else back in 2008, it was worth the risk IMO.

Prior to the 2008 elections I harped on Obama's experience- both in terms of breadth as well as how pertinent his actual experience was. I think a lot of the gripes about his preparedness for the office have been borne out at least to a degree, but as time goes by I have changed my thinking on Obama in terms of his preparedness to be President.

I am not so sure his lack of experience is what has caused his problems since taking office. I think it is his personality. He has proven to be way too closed off and as a result what little advice he does take comes from a very small group of trusted advisors. And these advisors are as much idealogues as the neocons were... myopic, assured of their righteousness, and unwilling to consider that good policy must sometimes trump politics. Those first two bugaboos could also be used to describe the Bush admin but the third is unique to the Obama administration.

[Pwns]

To think people on this board scoffed at me circa 2008 for advocating voting third party.

Voting for Obama, like I did, was worth the risk IMO. He was dynamic enough and he could've done a lot more. Unfortunately, his inexperience crippled him in his first year or two and he let the supermajority in Congress dictate too much. He never properly addressed the economy and he made a lot of enemies, resulting in the remarkable flipping of the House to the Republicans in just two short years. And to say his foreign policy has been muddled is to be kind. But I still wouldn't have wanted to vote for someone else back in 2008, it was worth the risk IMO.

I don't claim to be more astute about these things than you or most others on this board, but I didn't see anything but a smooth talker when he campaigned in 2008. That doesn't actually translate to leadership.

[BDKJMU]

So if we can blame the democrats for Reagan's spending and amnesty, can we blame the revolutionary republicans for Clinton signing Graham-Leach-Bliley and the CFMA? Those two pieces of legislation have **** the economy as much as anything else has. BTW, Reagan's Central Valley ag base loved the amnesty. Just sayin'.

Reagan was a master salesman and that's about it. He presided over the fall of the USSR as much as won the cold war. The war on drugs escalated under his presidency coinciding with the brilliant Nancy slogan of "Just say no". He traded with terrorist regimes, along with Charlie Wilson, armed "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan, and supported repressive groups in Latin America.

But the biggest daggers were of course reaganomics and the meme that government is the enemy. Conks have been riding these horses ever since and more than a few donks have jumped on board once they realized that union support was being outpaced by corporate support. Today, both are the parties of big business, low taxes, financial deregulation, corporatism, crony capitalism, and top down economics in general.

Reagan, Obama, W…all pretty **** bad.

Not all conks have been as you put it riding that meme, and very few donks. And those conks haven't been doing a good enough job riding it because STILL govt and govt spending has MASSIVELY grown relative to inflation. Now imagine how much more it would have grown if some conks hadn't been riding that meme to at least slow the massive growth rate down a little.

[∞∞∞]

Meh, Obama's ok. He hasn't really damaged the country, but he hasn't done anything special either (other than the ACA). IMO, he'll be remembered as a weak President that accomplished one major piece of legislation, but for the most part, allowed one of the worst Congress in US history to "bully" him.

That said, he does seem like he's trying to push back now, but it's probably too late.

I've only lived through two Presidencies that I can clearly remember and critically judge: Bush and Obama. IMHO, Bush was the worst...by a long shot. I'll remember Obama as...unmemorable.

[BDKJMU]

Meh, Obama's ok. He hasn't really damaged the country,but he hasn't done anything special either (other than the ACA). IMO, he'll be remembered as a weak President that accomplished one major piece of legislation, but for the most part, allowed one of the worst Congress in US history to "bully" him.

That said, he does seem like he's trying to push back now, but it's probably too late.

I've only lived through two Presidencies that I can clearly remember and critically judge: Bush and Obama. IMHO, Bush was the worst...by a long shot. I'll remember Obama as...unmemorable.

Actually, maybe I shouldn't be laughing..

[travelinman67]

Meh, Obama's ok. He hasn't really damaged the country, but he hasn't done anything special either (other than the ACA). IMO, he'll be remembered as a weak President that accomplished one major piece of legislation, but for the most part, allowed one of the worst Congress in US history to "bully" him.

That said, he does seem like he's trying to push back now, but it's probably too late.

I've only lived through two Presidencies that I can clearly remember and critically judge: Bush and Obama. IMHO, Bush was the worst...by a long shot. I'll remember Obama as...unmemorable.

[travelinman67]

So if we can blame the democrats for Reagan's spending and amnesty, can we blame the revolutionary republicans for Clinton signing Graham-Leach-Bliley and the CFMA? Those two pieces of legislation have fucked the economy as much as anything else has. BTW, Reagan's Central Valley ag base loved the amnesty. Just sayin'.

Reagan was a master salesman and that's about it. He presided over the fall of the USSR as much as won the cold war. The war on drugs escalated under his presidency coinciding with the brilliant Nancy slogan of "Just say no". He traded with terrorist regimes, along with Charlie Wilson, armed "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan, and supported repressive groups in Latin America.

But the biggest daggers were of course reaganomics and the meme that government is the enemy. Conks have been riding these horses ever since and more than a few donks have jumped on board once they realized that union support was being outpaced by corporate support. Today, both are the parties of big business, low taxes, financial deregulation, corporatism, crony capitalism, and top down economics in general.

Reagan, Obama, W…all pretty fucking bad.

Same 'ol kalm, same 'ol revisionist history talking points from the CAP.

Please tell the class kalm, who was the last great 'Merican president we should be emulating right now?

This!

[kalm]

Chavez...duh!

Nice dodge.

Oh, I'm sorry...I hadn't realized you countered...

[kalm]

Same 'ol kalm, same 'ol revisionist history talking points from the CAP.

Please tell the class kalm, who was the last great 'Merican president we should be emulating right now?

This!

Two substantive posts in a row from you! I'm proud!