• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Worst U.S. Presidents.

Which were the worst U.S. Presidnts?


  • Total voters
    43
FinnMacCool said:
The Republicans back then weren't the same as the republicans now. Democrats and republicans switched roles over the years. If the republicans of yester year were like the republicans of today, all the democrats would be republicans. Thats why I think its funny when republicans think that republicans are a great party cause of him.

Agreed...

I've said this before....by today's standards, Lincoln would be a Democrat and Kennedy would be a Republican...
 
Navy Pride said:
The poll starter very conventiently left off "Slick Willie' because if were there he would win in a landslide.................

That's obvious. Who the hell is "Bush II" anyway? There's George Herber Walker Bush, and now we're enduring another Bush, George Walker Bush, but no "Bush Aye-Aye" and no "Bush Eye-Eye", either.

I"m surprised they gave us a shot at FDR.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
That's obvious. Who the hell is "Bush II" anyway? There's George Herber Walker Bush, and now we're enduring another Bush, George Walker Bush, but no "Bush Aye-Aye" and no "Bush Eye-Eye", either.

I"m surprised they gave us a shot at FDR.

You might be enduring another one for 8 more years if Jeb decides to run.............Would that torque the jaws of you Bush haters???

I love it........
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Enemy's lists, abuse of the IRS! Hey, thanks for reminding me. You know, there are sooo many things Clinton did it's really impossible to keep track of it all without a good concordance.

Billy Dale, improperly fired from his position as White House travel agent, and his staff, and then the IRS was improperly used in a lame attempt to substantiate his removal. Hillary was (is) such a clod. During the reign of the Rapist, many "enemies" of the Clintons got special attention from the IRS.

Here's a question: Is there anything Nixon did that Clinton didn't do worse?
If you seriously are comparing a blow job to the incredible constitutional crisis created by Nixon and his henchmen then you might want to consider doing a bit more research on Watergate?

It's like you're comparing a the Falklands War to WWII. When Nixon was President the Republic almost came apart.

Just because you personally hate President Clinton for his politics does not make him a bad President. My assertion re Nixon is based on his actions, not his politics. He was a criminal, not someone with a sex addiction.

The lack of knowledge it takes to suggest that Clinton was more nefarious than Nixon is stunning, sorry.
 
Navy Pride said:
You might be enduring another one for 8 more years if Jeb decides to run.............Would that torque the jaws of you Bush haters???

I love it........

"Bush hater"? Moi? Nope. But I know mediocrity when it's in front of me. If the best the GOP can do in 2008 is Jeb, then the Red Queen, the Carpet Baggin' Whore from New York,...er Arkansas,...I mean Chicago will get a second chance to steal White House silverware, and Billy can re-visit that little alcove off the Oral Office.

I really don't think another Bush will sit on the throne in DC. The goal should be to keep the Red Queen off the pot.
 
26 X World Champs said:
If you seriously are comparing a blow job to the incredible constitutional crisis created by Nixon and his henchmen then you might want to consider doing a bit more research on Watergate?


No. I'm seriously comparing obstruction of justice charges, coupled with perjury, dereliction of duty, and abuse of power in the Clinton Administration with obstruction of justice and abuse of power under Nixon.

Oh, look, Clinton has a felony, perjury, and dereliction of duty, too.

Needless to say, while Bill was busy getting head with Monica under the desk, he was discussing future troop deployments with a Congressman on the telepohe. While his and the nation's attention was focused on his perjury, he failed to contain Osama bin Laden.

Yeah, I'll balance Nixon against Clinton, and Nixon will be the better president.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
"Bush hater"? Moi? Nope. But I know mediocrity when it's in front of me. If the best the GOP can do in 2008 is Jeb, then the Red Queen, the Carpet Baggin' Whore from New York,...er Arkansas,...I mean Chicago will get a second chance to steal White House silverware, and Billy can re-visit that little alcove off the Oral Office.

I really don't think another Bush will sit on the throne in DC. The goal should be to keep the Red Queen off the pot.

Jeb probably won't run but it sure would be ironic if he did and was elected.......The lefties would go nuts.........

As far as the "Ice Princess" goes she will probably win the dem nomination unless another Clinton scandal comes along, but she will get creamed in the election...............Her negatives are way to high and she is not fooling anyone pretending to move to the center like "Slick Willie" did.......

You know what they say........Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.......
 
Navy Pride said:
As far as the "Ice Princess" goes she will probably win the dem nomination unles another Clinton scandal comes along, but she will get creamed in the election...............Her negatives are way to high and she is not fooling anyone pretending to move to the center like "Slick Willie" did.......

Oh, the Republicans are famous for their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I'm sure that if the Dums nominate that broad from New York the Repubs will feel compelled to put a bimbo on their ticket. Probably Liberal Dole, or maybe even Condi Rice, to maximize the utter lack of experience on their ticket while simultaneously doing the "see we're not racist" thing, too.

Politics and elections are no longer about issues, they're about image and manipulation.

It's pretty clear to all that public education has been a success and thought is no longer gets between the politician and his voter.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Oh, the Republicans are famous for their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I'm sure that if the Dums nominate that broad from New York the Repubs will feel compelled to put a bimbo on their ticket. Probably Liberal Dole, or maybe even Condi Rice, to maximize the utter lack of experience on their ticket while simultaneously doing the "see we're not racist" thing, too.

Politics and elections are no longer about issues, they're about image and manipulation.

It's pretty clear to all that public education has been a success and thought is no longer gets between the politician and his voter.

Hey, I wouldn't have a problem voting for Dole.
Then again, she IS a senator from my state.....
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Oh, the Republicans are famous for their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I'm sure that if the Dums nominate that broad from New York the Repubs will feel compelled to put a bimbo on their ticket. Probably Liberal Dole, or maybe even Condi Rice, to maximize the utter lack of experience on their ticket while simultaneously doing the "see we're not racist" thing, too.

Politics and elections are no longer about issues, they're about image and manipulation.

It's pretty clear to all that public education has been a success and thought is no longer gets between the politician and his voter.

Excellent points.....I could not have said it better........
 
The choices we're allowed to vote from are NOT representative of the actual worst presidents. Franklin Pierce, Andrew Johnson, and Jimmy Carter are simply not among the worst under any criteria. Sure, none of them were particularly impressive and may have been downright bad, but the worst of all time? None of them did anything.

A more reasonable list (balanced for varying ideologies) would look something like this:

- Ulysses S. Grant (Rampant cronyism and corruption)
- Woodrow Wilson (Set the conditions for WWII)
- Warren Harding (Rampant cronyism and corruption)
- Herbert Hoover (Fiddled while Rome burned)
- Franklin D. Roosevelt (Worst ideology of any president, set terrible precedents that still infect our government today)
- Lyndon B. Johnson (The Great Society AND The Vietnam War)
- Richard Nixon (The closest thing to a dictator we've ever had)
- George W. Bush (Sheer incompetence in every aspect of governance)

By historical standards, every president of the last 80 years has been bad. Where are our modern-day George Washingtons and Thomas Jeffersons? They're all teaching college or managing businesses, instead of governing.
 
Last edited:
cnredd said:
Agreed...

I've said this before....by today's standards, Lincoln would be a Democrat and Kennedy would be a Republican...

Kennedy described himself as a proud liberal and a New Deal Democrat. He would one of the most liberal Democrats today by today's standards. John Kerry was more conservative that JFK.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Kennedy described himself as a proud liberal and a New Deal Democrat. He would one of the most liberal Democrats today by today's standards. John Kerry was more conservative that JFK.

SD boy are you confused on this one.......I don't know how old you are but I voted my first time for Kennedy and he backed one of the biggest tax cuts in this countrys history....And as you democrats like to spin it was all for the rich..........Kennedy was no liberal and Kerry is the biggest liberal in the Senate.........

Oh and Kennedy was strongly pro life.........Get real......
 
Navy Pride said:
SD boy are you confused on this one.......I don't know how old you are but I voted my first time for Kennedy and he backed one of the biggest tax cuts in this countrys history....And as you democrats like to spin it was all for the rich..........Kennedy was no liberal and Kerry is the biggest liberal in the Senate.........

Oh and Kennedy was strongly pro life.........Get real......
You're a frickin' genius Navy Pride! I think your posts are batting 1.000, every word is wrong, every time. JFK was and will always be a LIBERAL DEMOCRAT! For you, in your written words of ignorance to suggest otherwise is not surprising, considering the source.

How about we read JFK's acceptance speech given in 1960 to the Liberal Party of New York when they nominated him for President? Sound like a decent source to you? JFK's own words?

Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party Nomination
September 14, 1960


What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

But first, I would like to say what I understand the word "Liberal" to mean and explain in the process why I consider myself to be a "Liberal," and what it means in the presidential election of 1960.

In short, having set forth my view -- I hope for all time -- two nights ago in Houston, on the proper relationship between church and state, I want to take the opportunity to set forth my views on the proper relationship between the state and the citizen. This is my political credo:

I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves.(SNIP)

Our responsibility is not discharged by announcement of virtuous ends. Our responsibility is to achieve these objectives with social invention, with political skill, and executive vigor. I believe for these reasons that liberalism is our best and only hope in the world today. For the liberal society is a free society, and it is at the same time and for that reason a strong society. Its strength is drawn from the will of free people committed to great ends and peacefully striving to meet them. Only liberalism, in short, can repair our national power, restore our national purpose, and liberate our national energies. And the only basic issue in the 1960 campaign is whether our government will fall in a conservative rut and die there, or whether we will move ahead in the liberal spirit of daring, of breaking new ground, of doing in our generation what Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson did in their time of influence and responsibility.

Our liberalism has its roots in our diverse origins. Most of us are descended from that segment of the American population which was once called an immigrant minority. Today, along with our children and grandchildren, we do not feel minor. We feel proud of our origins and we are not second to any group in our sense of national purpose. For many years New York represented the new frontier to all those who came from the ends of the earth to find new opportunity and new freedom, generations of men and women who fled from the despotism of the czars, the horrors of the Nazis, the tyranny of hunger, who came here to the new frontier in the State of New York. These men and women, a living cross section of American history, indeed, a cross section of the entire world's history of pain and hope, made of this city not only a new world of opportunity, but a new world of the spirit as well.
Later in the same speech JFK said:
And tonight we salute Adlai Stevenson as an eloquent spokesman for the effort to achieve an intelligent foreign policy. Our opponents would like the people to believe that in a time of danger it would be hazardous to change the administration that has brought us to this time of danger. I think it would be hazardous not to change. I think it would be hazardous to continue four more years of stagnation and indifference here at home and abroad, of starving the underpinnings of our national power, including not only our defense but our image abroad as a friend.
He also said:
The reason that Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman and Adlai Stevenson had influence abroad, and the United States in their time had it, was because they moved this country here at home, because they stood for something here in the United States, for expanding the benefits of our society to our own people, and the people around the world looked to us as a symbol of hope.
You can read the entire speech here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/35_kennedy/psources/ps_nyliberal.html

It's not surprising that Conservatives and Republicans need to turn to Democrats like JFK as their "heroes" since the illustrious history of their party is so weak and so responsible for the majority of problems we have today.

You're a frickin' genius Navy Pride!
 
26 X World Champs said:
You're a frickin' genius Navy Pride! I think your posts are batting 1.000, every word is wrong, every time. JFK was and will always be a LIBERAL DEMOCRAT! For you, in your written words of ignorance to suggest otherwise is not surprising, considering the source.

How about we read JFK's acceptance speech given in 1960 to the Liberal Party of New York when they nominated him for President? Sound like a decent source to you? JFK's own words?


Later in the same speech JFK said:

He also said:

You can read the entire speech here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/35_kennedy/psources/ps_nyliberal.html

It's not surprising that Conservatives and Republicans need to turn to Democrats like JFK as their "heroes" since the illustrious history of their party is so weak and so responsible for the majority of problems we have today.

You're a frickin' genius Navy Pride!

Another liberal who was wet behind the ears when Kennedy was elected..........I was there little boy.......I cried when he was assaisinated.....

There has never been a liberal that favored tax cuts or was pro life........get a clue........
 
Navy Pride said:
Another liberal who was wet behind the ears when Kennedy was elected..........I was there little boy.......I cried when he was assaisinated.....

There has never been a liberal that favored tax cuts or was pro life........get a clue........
Dude, do you have issues with reading or something? My post were JFK's own words. They are indisputable. Only someone who is unable to read and understand that post would suggest that JFK wasn't a Liberal! It's amazing that you're unable to understand a post that is a direct speech from JFK!

You never cease to amaze me! I post JFK's acceptance speech to the LIBERAL PARTY of NY in 1960 and you dispute those words as untrue!

I must admit that the ignorance of your posts does amuse me! Your posts provide me with more laughs than "The Daily Show" which I think is hilarious.

The fact that you're older than I am means $hit Navy Pride. I was around when JFK was assasinated too, but even if I were not I am smart enough to know that even someone with a below average IQ can read JFK's speech, his own words, written by him and that are a matter of public record and know that every single thing that you've written on the subject is wrong, wrong, wrong.

You're a frickin' genius Navy Pride!
 
26 X World Champs said:
Dude, do you have issues with reading or something? My post were JFK's own words. They are indisputable. Only someone who is unable to read and understand that post would suggest that JFK wasn't a Liberal! It's amazing that you're unable to understand a post that is a direct speech from JFK!

You never cease to amaze me! I post JFK's acceptance speech to the LIBERAL PARTY of NY in 1960 and you dispute those words as untrue!

I must admit that the ignorance of your posts does amuse me! Your posts provide me with more laughs than "The Daily Show" which I think is hilarious.

The fact that you're older than I am means $hit Navy Pride. I was around when JFK was assasinated too, but even if I were not I am smart enough to know that even someone with a below average IQ can read JFK's speech, his own words, written by him and that are a matter of public record and know that every single thing that you've written on the subject is wrong, wrong, wrong.

You're a frickin' genius Navy Pride!


You are correct, the modern day liberal does not resemble the liberal of old in the slightest, so I can understand the confussion.
 
Donkey1499 said:
JFK and LBJ were a little reluctant to sign the 1964 Civil Rights Act. They didn't think that Congress would approve of it.
I'm not trying to be disagreeable but Presidents sign bills only AFTER they are ratified by Congress, plus JFK was assinated in 1963...
 
Deegan said:
You are correct, the modern day liberal does not resemble the liberal of old in the slightest, so I can understand the confussion.
I respectfully disagree. Navy Pride is trying his best to suggest that JFK would be a Conservative if he were alive today, and that is what I find to be so very wrong.

It is a disrespect to his memory and the causes he fought to write such drivel. Then again, considering the source and his batting average it doesn't surprise me that his posts are all illogical and incorrect. I guess in this instance one might say that Navy Pride's post in this thread re JFK are not only incorrect, but also politically incorrect.

How lame is it to disregard someone's speech about being a liberal to insist that he is a Conservative? YIKES!
 
26 X World Champs said:
I respectfully disagree. Navy Pride is trying his best to suggest that JFK would be a Conservative if he were alive today, and that is what I find to be so very wrong.

It is a disrespect to his memory and the causes he fought to write such drivel. Then again, considering the source and his batting average it doesn't surprise me that his posts are all illogical and incorrect. I guess in this instance one might say that Navy Pride's post in this thread re JFK are not only incorrect, but also politically incorrect.

How lame is it to disregard someone's speech about being a liberal to insist that he is a Conservative? YIKES!


Well......he would not be the first liberal "mugged by reality" that chose to join the conservative party. I don't know if he would either, but he was very different from liberals today, as I said before, and his great quote goes to that assumption, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.";)
 
Deegan said:
Well......he would not be the first liberal "mugged by reality" that chose to join the conservative party. I don't know if he would either, but he was very different from liberals today, as I said before, and his great quote goes to that assumption, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.";)
JFK would be 88 years old this November if he were still alive. I can't see him or any Kennedy ever becoming a Republican or Conservative. If you would study their family history you will see / learn that the Kennedy Clan IS the Democratic Party in so many ways, always has been, always will be.

People like Navy Pride twist reality into their own warped version of it and then try to pass it off as fact, when in truth it is complete and utter nonsense.

JFK = Liberal Democrat then, now and forever...IMHO...
 
26 X World Champs said:
JFK would be 88 years old this November if he were still alive. I can't see him or any Kennedy ever becoming a Republican or Conservative. If you would study their family history you will see / learn that the Kennedy Clan IS the Democratic Party in so many ways, always has been, always will be.

People like Navy Pride twist reality into their own warped version of it and then try to pass it off as fact, when in truth it is complete and utter nonsense.

JFK = Liberal Democrat then, now and forever...IMHO...

I don't think he would either, but the Democratic party would look a helluva lot different today, that is for sure. I really miss his brand of politics, we lost a good man that fateful day, and I believe our country suffered for that loss.:(
 
Deegan said:
I don't think he would either, but the Democratic party would look a helluva lot different today, that is for sure. I really miss his brand of politics, we lost a good man that fateful day, and I believe our country suffered for that loss.:(
I agree with you! You know what JFK brought to the table? HOPE! He was such a great speaker, his words touched our souls. He inspired this nation and the world like no other man that I've known in my lifetime.

The contrast between JFK and W is stark and painful. Is there a worse public speaker than W? Unless he's reading from a teleprompter he sounds like an illiterate AND his inflections, something JFK was a master at are so awful and uninspiring.

Think how much the world loved JFK and compare that to how much the world despises W? WOW!
 
Navy Pride said:
SD boy are you confused on this one.......I don't know how old you are but I voted my first time for Kennedy and he backed one of the biggest tax cuts in this countrys history....And as you democrats like to spin it was all for the rich..........Kennedy was no liberal and Kerry is the biggest liberal in the Senate.........

Oh and Kennedy was strongly pro life.........Get real......

Your revisionist history doesn't fly.

The top tax rate when Kennedy went into office was 91%, he only cut it down to 70%. Hardly a conservative. Could you imagine if someone proposed that we have a 70% tax rate for the top bracket today?

Howard Dean while Governor of Vermont signed two taxcuts. Do you think that Howard Dean is a conservative?

There is not a non-partisan political scientist alive today who would not say that the Democratic Party has moved closer to the center over the last 30 years and the Republican Party has moved further to the right. Barry Goldwater represented the most conservative wing of the Republican Party in the 60s, today, Barry Goldwater would be at best a Moderate Republican. Eisenhower was a solid Republican in the 50s, today, he would be ideologically on par with a very liberal Democrat. Richard Nixon was a solid Republican in the 70s, today he would be a very liberal Republican.
 
Back
Top Bottom