• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

JFK v. djt

The GREAT Presidents usually are Washington, Lincoln and FDRoosevelt. I would place JFK in a group of eight bend that which would include Jefferson, Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Clinton and Obama.

Not to derail my thread with this side topic, but I'd have to consider Jefferson as president (what exactly did he do/fight for as president), Teddy was a mix of great and horrible, Truman not so much, Eisenhower was mostly a disaster and some good, and Clinton and Obama very dubious for great.

Had JFK served for two terms - who knows what was possible?

He'd have 'been the same president', who did some more, grew some more. In fact, he might have gone down much worse.

Let's consider some alternative history how these things work.

What was the Bay of Pigs? Well, for a start, when it was designed, under 'the leadership of the D-Day leader Eisenhower', Castro was seen as the #1 threat by the American people. It's why JFK ran on doing MORE against Castro. Americans wanted him out. So at face value, the Bay of Pigs was America supporting the freedom of the Cuban people to revolt against a communist tyrant much as America had won independence from England, a great cause.

Yet it was also the latest in a string of corrupt and arrogant self-serving abuses of power, designed incompetently, simply designed for the US to keep who controlled Cuba as a puppet, not for the benefit of the Cuban people really, who had revolted against US puppet Batista for a reason, a plan with hidden elements such as a false-flag attack by Cuban rebels on US forces at Guantanemo, and furthermore a plan the CIA decided it knew better than the president about, and it chose to deceive Kennedy by lying to him abut the plan to evade the limits he put on it, dooming it to failure, trying to force him into a war he did not want - what Robert Kennedy rightly called 'virtually treason'.

1/2
 
But let's say JFK had - as he said he wished he had - killed the plan. Then it wouldn't have gone down in history as a military blunder and disaster. It would have gone down as the masterful plan of the D-Day general, which could have nipped the Castro communist threat in the bud and obtained liberation for the Cuban people, but Kennedy incompetently and cowardly killed Eisenhower's plan. He was a disaster as president, weak. That's how history works. Everyone would have assumed the invasion would have gone great and the Cuban rebels would have won just like D-Day won. It probably would have destroyed JFK as president from the start. In short, he had no 'good' option. Fail by killing the plan, fail by launching it, fail by launching a greater war.

Similarly, JFK would not have launched the Vietnam war. But what was the Vietnam war at the time? A popular war when it began, all about the liberation of Vietnam and protecting a region of Asia from a communist threat. If JFK pulled out, as he would and was planning when there wasn't victory soon, let's let JFK describe the result:

"In 1965, I'll become one of the most unpopular presidents in history. I'll be damned everywhere as a Communist appeaser. But now I don't care. If I tried to pull out completely now from Vietnam, we would have another Joe McCarthy red scare on our hands, but I can do it after I'm reelected. So we had better make damn sure that I am reelected."

And that's a big part of what made JFK great. Most president wouldn't have the understanding of the options, the morality to care what was 'right' instead of what was politically expedient, the willingness to put their presidency and reputation at risk to do the right thing.

So imagine JFK is right - instead of Vietnam being what it is, one of the greatest American blunders, corrupt, foolish even if with some nobility, murdering millions of Vietnamese needlessly, destroying the presidency of LBJ, that instead it had gone down as JFK "damned everywhere as a Communist appeaser", who lost the opportunity to stand for the freedom of the Vietnamese people, a weak president rated lowly in history. That could be a big part of his second term.

His historic civil rights bill was passed with LBJ's skill in honor of JFK; if JFK had tried to pass it, it might have failed, and the south could have kept their threat to kill all of his legislative agenda. Progress would have continued on the expensive moon launch as it did, but it wasn't scheduled while he was president.

On the other hand, there might have been great things. He planned an overhaul of the CIA by Robert Kennedy his second term, which then wasn't known publicly to be the monstrous agency it was. He was working on change in Cuba one way or another, and especially importantly, he was working on an end to the cold war with Khrushchev. It might have ended 20 years earlier.

Whether that would have been seen as 'great' and a big Kennedy accomplishment, instead of the Soviet Union failing on its own as it did later, is a question. We might still have the Soviet Union to this day, peacefully co-existing. We might have abolished nuclear weapons.

In many ways, domestically, LBJ was a second Kennedy term, carrying out many of the same policies. It's in foreign policy they differed a lot. Another big deal is that a second JFK term might have not led to a Nixon election in 1968, preventing that disaster, from his corruption to his Supreme court shift to his moves to empower plutocracy to his Vietnam disaster to Watergate and the harm to the office of the presidency.

2/2
 
John F. Kennedy grew up the son of a wealthy, powerful man; much more than trump's father. Joe Kennedy was the youngest bank president in the country, and made fortunes in the stock market, real estate, he founded a movie studio, and imported liquor when prohibition was repealed.

Joe Kennedy was a gangster who made his fortune running booze and guns. Brilliant would be an understatement for the man, but morality, a sphere of his own making. With connections deep in the Irish mob of Boston, he exchanged American made weapons with the IRA for Irish Whiskey during prohibition, supplying him, along with his string of bars and clubs in Southie (of Boston) with the cash to convert them to speakeasies, until he dominated the speakeasies and distribution of illegal alcoholic beverages throughout New England short of Maine, and northern Vermont. He did not just start a bank, but a bank that was made for money laundering. money from organized crime and corrupt union leaders, giving him a piece of the vig from every gambling operation and loan sharking operation in the country. His ties to California, an open territory in mob eyes, were through the unions, which allowed him to start a studio that became his personal stable of young starlets. By the end of prohibition, he had secured a monopoly of all Champagne imports, and the bank leant him an aura of Brahmin Boston respectability. The English had a bounty on his head for his gun running and ties to the IRA, dead or alive. He never traveled anywhere without a coterie if tough Irish bodyguards, nor was his estates ever not well guarded by the same. He scooped up real property with laundered mob money, always paying a premium when Union pension funds had been used to mortgage those properties, and the management was failing, all part of his corrupt money laundering. There was no end to his ambitions, and having a son in the presidency was a good part of his search for respectability. His favorite and older son, Joe jr was groomed for the job, and convinced by his father, coming home a war hero was the path to success. He died for old Joe's ambitions. John, his second son was groomed to pick up the mantle. Bobby was an afterthought. Even the marriage of his second son to an old money family, in bankruptcy, was a planned step toward respectability. Camelot was always a myth.

Had JFK not been martyred by an assassin's bullets, we would likely be looking back at one of our worst presidents, rather than a hero. He was responsible for starting the Cuban missile crisis, bring the world to the brink of an all destructive nuclear war. He was responsible for expanding the American presence in Vietnam, despite publicly stating he wanted to withdraw. His rabid anti communism, a product of his father's ambitions, acutely expanded as old Joe had been one of the prime investors in the Cuban Casinos and the Batista government. Cuba had been his personal fiefdom during prohibition for running both guns and Isrish whiskey to and from the US. John showed his true colors by refusing promised support at the last minute for the CIA instigated Bay of Pigs invasion. And lest we forget, Kennedy mouthed civil rights, but as a senator opposed all bills to improve civil rights, because with his father's guidance, people of color were good for the self abuse of vices, a market for his goods, and had no souls.

Moreover his infamous quote "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" flouted the concept of the government for and by the people that Lincoln made so famous. Thus creating a legacy we all suffer from today, a government that sees itself as disconnected from the people, a superior ruling elite. In essence, this makes Donald Trump the spiritual heir of JFK. And the same for all our leading politicians from both parties today. An unwelcome and devastating axial moment in American politics.
 
Your slavish adoration of an at best mediocre president JFK is noted.

I know right? How come he wasn't more like Trump? Why didn't he manage to bankrupt numerous casinos, like Trump? Why didn't he constantly eed daddy to come bail him out, like Trump? Where are the fake universities from JFK, like Trump? Why didn't he steal from charity, like Trump? Why didn't he scam money from children with cancer, like Trump? JFK was no Trump, that's for sure.
 
Not to derail my thread with this side topic, but I'd have to consider Jefferson as president (what exactly did he do/fight for as president), Teddy was a mix of great and horrible, Truman not so much, Eisenhower was mostly a disaster and some good, and Clinton and Obama very dubious for great.



He'd have 'been the same president', who did some more, grew some more. In fact, he might have gone down much worse.

Let's consider some alternative history how these things work.

What was the Bay of Pigs? Well, for a start, when it was designed, under 'the leadership of the D-Day leader Eisenhower', Castro was seen as the #1 threat by the American people. It's why JFK ran on doing MORE against Castro. Americans wanted him out. So at face value, the Bay of Pigs was America supporting the freedom of the Cuban people to revolt against a communist tyrant much as America had won independence from England, a great cause.

Yet it was also the latest in a string of corrupt and arrogant self-serving abuses of power, designed incompetently, simply designed for the US to keep who controlled Cuba as a puppet, not for the benefit of the Cuban people really, who had revolted against US puppet Batista for a reason, a plan with hidden elements such as a false-flag attack by Cuban rebels on US forces at Guantanemo, and furthermore a plan the CIA decided it knew better than the president about, and it chose to deceive Kennedy by lying to him abut the plan to evade the limits he put on it, dooming it to failure, trying to force him into a war he did not want - what Robert Kennedy rightly called 'virtually treason'.

1/2

Interesting analysis. Thanks Craig. :)
 
That's like saying 'the best meals in America include McDonalds. Many eat it.' It's, no offense, not even a little bit thoughtful about the issue IMO to just name 'greatest hits'.

WHAT makes Washington a 'great president' other than being first? WHAT makes Lincoln a 'great president' other than being president during a major event of civil war, and an eloquent lawyer? But but he's on Mount Rushmore and everyone says. Not much of a reason. I'm not sure you're ready for that discussion? There is a lot to the issue of what a great president is, and why they are. Note that I do include FDR as great.

Washington was a great president for defining the nation when he refused Kingship. That alone sufficed for greatness, not even discussing his role for keeping the Revolution alive, and defeating a far superior British military force. Lincoln, despite being an eloquent lawyer, kept the nation unified, at least within the laws of the land. Not merely because he happened to be president during a major event, an event in which the north just wanted to walk away. FDR proved himself great as a wartime president, unequaled since Washington and Lincoln, so yes, he was great. I'd also add Grant to that list, but that's another story for another day.
 
Jefferson is way overrated. Clinton and Obama were bottom tier presidents as well.

I suspect your personal lean is making that determination.
 
That's like saying 'the best meals in America include McDonalds. Many eat it.' It's, no offense, not even a little bit thoughtful about the issue IMO to just name 'greatest hits'.

WHAT makes Washington a 'great president' other than being first? WHAT makes Lincoln a 'great president' other than being president during a major event of civil war, and an eloquent lawyer? But but he's on Mount Rushmore and everyone says. Not much of a reason. I'm not sure you're ready for that discussion? There is a lot to the issue of what a great president is, and why they are. Note that I do include FDR as great.

I said nothing about restaurants. This is this.... not something else.

Washington created the mold and set the precedent of a leader peacefully departing which is one of the genius assets of our system.

Lincoln presided over the greatest division in the history of the nation and successfully kept the country together.
 
Not to derail my thread with this side topic, but I'd have to consider Jefferson as president (what exactly did he do/fight for as president), Teddy was a mix of great and horrible, Truman not so much, Eisenhower was mostly a disaster and some good, and Clinton and Obama very dubious for great.



He'd have 'been the same president', who did some more, grew some more. In fact, he might have gone down much worse.

Let's consider some alternative history how these things work.

What was the Bay of Pigs? Well, for a start, when it was designed, under 'the leadership of the D-Day leader Eisenhower', Castro was seen as the #1 threat by the American people. It's why JFK ran on doing MORE against Castro. Americans wanted him out. So at face value, the Bay of Pigs was America supporting the freedom of the Cuban people to revolt against a communist tyrant much as America had won independence from England, a great cause.

Yet it was also the latest in a string of corrupt and arrogant self-serving abuses of power, designed incompetently, simply designed for the US to keep who controlled Cuba as a puppet, not for the benefit of the Cuban people really, who had revolted against US puppet Batista for a reason, a plan with hidden elements such as a false-flag attack by Cuban rebels on US forces at Guantanemo, and furthermore a plan the CIA decided it knew better than the president about, and it chose to deceive Kennedy by lying to him abut the plan to evade the limits he put on it, dooming it to failure, trying to force him into a war he did not want - what Robert Kennedy rightly called 'virtually treason'.

1/2

You bring up some good points.

Teddy and Jefferson fall just outside the three GREAT presidents and are near the top of the second tier.

JFK learned a great lesson from the Bay of Pigs and that would have served him well in a second term. There was nowhere to go but up. But its all speculative so anything could have happened.
 
most historians are caught up in the entire dead Kennedy mythos as well.

1) His resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis was poor for starters.

2) His lack of support (despite the public perception) for the manned space program.

For starters.

That's two starters??? Anyway the Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved without nuclear war, that was a win; all he gave was "not" putting missiles in Turkey that we didn't want anyway.

And, apparently, you missed his speech about putting a man on the moon before the decade was out.

He was a GREAT President by any standard, if not our Greatest Modern President.

… For Starters.
 
Bay of Pigs, for one. If you are going to support an uprising, support it all the way. If you are going to back out halfway through, don’t support them at all. His approach only succeeded in getting a lot of people killed and directly led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The Bay of Pigs, was the result of the General Staff working behind his back and disobeying his orders.
 
I know right? How come he wasn't more like Trump? Why didn't he manage to bankrupt numerous casinos, like Trump? Why didn't he constantly eed daddy to come bail him out, like Trump? Where are the fake universities from JFK, like Trump? Why didn't he steal from charity, like Trump? Why didn't he scam money from children with cancer, like Trump? JFK was no Trump, that's for sure.

Who cares? I've loathed Trump for more than 30 years.
 
The Bay of Pigs, was the result of the General Staff working behind his back and disobeying his orders.

Actually....

“Top aides to Kennedy, such as Dean Rusk and both Joint Chiefs of Staff, later said that they had hesitations about the plans but muted their thoughts. Some leaders blamed these problems on the "Cold War mindset" or the determination of the Kennedy brothers to oust Castro and fulfill campaign promises.[86] Military advisers were skeptical of its potential for success as well.[73] Despite these hesitations, Kennedy still ordered the attack to take place.[73]“.

Bay of Pigs Invasion - Wikipedia

Kennedy’s waffling not only solidified the Cuban revolutionaries, it made Khrushchev think he was weak.

Guess that’s what happens when you are more interested in cheating on your wife then running the country.
 
That's two starters??? Anyway the Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved without nuclear war, that was a win; all he gave was "not" putting missiles in Turkey that we didn't want anyway.

And, apparently, you missed his speech about putting a man on the moon before the decade was out.

He was a GREAT President by any standard, if not our Greatest Modern President.

… For Starters.

Kennedy could've simply destroyed the missiles in Cuba with a preemptive airstrike (as Eisenhower advised him to do as Ike didn't think the Soviets would go to war over Cuba).

And Kennedy never really supported the manned space program. He openly said in private that "if it weren't for the Russians we should've be spending all this money on space".
 
That's two starters??? Anyway the Cuban Missile Crisis was resolved without nuclear war, that was a win; all he gave was "not" putting missiles in Turkey that we didn't want anyway.

And, apparently, you missed his speech about putting a man on the moon before the decade was out.

He was a GREAT President by any standard, if not our Greatest Modern President.

… For Starters.

Things shouldn’t have gotten to the point where there was a missile crisis. By projecting indecisiveness and, frankly, weakness, he emboldened the Soviet Union to place nuclear missiles on Cuba at a time when Castro was chomping at the bit for them to be used.
 
On the other hand, there might have been great things. He planned an overhaul of the CIA by Robert Kennedy his second term, which then wasn't known publicly to be the monstrous agency it was.


The CIA was never a "monstrous agency".
 
Actually....

“Top aides to Kennedy, such as Dean Rusk and both Joint Chiefs of Staff, later said that they had hesitations about the plans but muted their thoughts. Some leaders blamed these problems on the "Cold War mindset" or the determination of the Kennedy brothers to oust Castro and fulfill campaign promises.[86] Military advisers were skeptical of its potential for success as well.[73] Despite these hesitations, Kennedy still ordered the attack to take place.[73]“.

Bay of Pigs Invasion - Wikipedia

Kennedy’s waffling not only solidified the Cuban revolutionaries, it made Khrushchev think he was weak.

Guess that’s what happens when you are more interested in cheating on your wife then running the country.

We're reading different history books, I've read the generals disobeyed his orders which caused the invasion to fail.
 
Kennedy could've simply destroyed the missiles in Cuba with a preemptive airstrike (as Eisenhower advised him to do as Ike didn't think the Soviets would go to war over Cuba).

That's not the history I've read.

And Kennedy never really supported the manned space program. He openly said in private that "if it weren't for the Russians we should've be spending all this money on space".

Never heard that before, I don't believe it.
 
Things shouldn’t have gotten to the point where there was a missile crisis. By projecting indecisiveness and, frankly, weakness, he emboldened the Soviet Union to place nuclear missiles on Cuba at a time when Castro was chomping at the bit for them to be used.

But they weren't
 
Let's compare a couple of president. trump will not like the comparison.

John F. Kennedy grew up the son of a wealthy, powerful man; much more than trump's father. Joe Kennedy was the youngest bank president in the country, and made fortunes in the stock market, real estate, he founded a movie studio, and imported liquor when prohibition was repealed.

He had the ear of a president, and was made the first head of the new SEC agency, as well as Ambassador to England. He was considered a candidate for president until he made a mistake when WWII started, that ended his political career.

He raised his children for public service. Every night, they were pushed to engage in family discussions about policies. Each son was given a million dollars when he became an adult 'so that he could call the father a son of a bitch if he wanted', and attended schools such as Harvard.

When WWII started, the eldest son, who was fully planned to run for president, did a dangerous tour of 25 bomber missions, making him eligible for going home. Instead, he volunteered for another dangerous mission, flying a bomb toward Germany, which exploded, killing him.

His younger brother, JFK, was rejected for military service for health reasons; he used his father's influence to get INTO combat, and commanded a PT Boat which was sunk and he became a war hero for his efforts to get his crew rescued.

JFK also wrote his first book, about how the allies had not prepared for war, which became a national bestseller. Later, in the hospital as a Senator, nearly killed by his health conditions, he wrote another book with his speechwriter, Ted Sorenson, "Profiles in Courage", which became a classic, and possibly with a little influence, won the Pulitzer Prize.

JFK had no plans for politics - he lacked the qualities of his brother. When his brother was killed, his father pushed him to replace him going into politics, and he did, learning. He won difficult elections for Congress and the Senate.

JFK had the luxury of 'trying to do the right thing' for the planet. He had toured the world, interrogating US embassies around the world, learning. He knew rich men and powerful men, and saw where they were good and bad. He'd seen where the appeal of a Hitler - including with his family - had led to disaster. He saw limits on the pursuit of wealth and humanity's broader needs.

He instinctively cared about the plights of black people, of poor people; when he ran for president, to get around the 'smoke-filled room dealmaking', he did what hadn't done before, and with Sorensen, flew to all 50 states, meeting with party leaders, building support to run in the primaries, and it worked.

He stumbled into supporting Martin Luther King, Jr. when he was arrested, and that was the turning point for race going from a non-partisan issue outside the south, to one where Democrats were the leaders. King's father, who was a Republican who planned to vote for Nixon, switch to support Kennedy, and many black voters followed.

JFK wanted to bring change to the century of racism that had followed the civil war with civil rights laws. Southern Democrats were united in opposition, telling JFK if he did, they would join Republicans to kill his entire agenda in Congress. JFK did not immediately submit the bill, but after 2 years, he did, despite the opposition, the first president to confront the nation with civil rights as a moral imperative.

JFK's concerns included trying to remove the threat of nuclear annihilation; his proudest achievement was the hard-fought passage, fighting his own Pentagon, of the Limited Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, ending the worst testing of nuclear weapons. They included trying to reduce poverty globally, fighting the sort of global corruption Republicans had embraced and been a leading cause of.

JFK became a hero around the world, representing a democratic culture, fighting both the tyranny of communist corruption and fascist corruption. He fought our allies' brutal colonies overseas; and the very powerful organized crime system in the US.
"Compare . . ." What you really mean "here's a semi-literal tirade against Trump".
 
Back
Top Bottom