Talk Elections

Which of these is the best president?

Franklin D. Roosevelt who led us out of the Great Depression and through a world war.  I thank God he was at the helm in those two crucial decades.  

By process of elimination, Truman.

Richard Nixon. He did much more for his country during his tenure then most on this list, and was exactly the kind of leader needed after LBJ. Shame about the Watergate thing.

It's taken me 10 years to appreciate what he did for this country- Bill Clinton

I guess Ford, then probably Carter.

FDR then LBJ then Truman, o/c.  1946 elections destroyed any chance the US would have to become a normal country.  all foreign policy has been genocidal since the move to Global Empire in 1945.

The man who saved the world while sitting down.

Supprised Kennedy has no votes.

FDR of course.

Good to see that no one voted for either Bush.

You probably shouldn't have included Franklin Roosevelt.

I'd rank them as:

1. Roosevelt
2. Truman
3. Eisenhower
4. Johnson
5. Kennedy
6. Obama
7. Carter
8. Ford
9. Nixon
10. Clinton
11. Bush I
12. Reagan
13. Bush II

Colored into the "tiers" I'd put them in. Bush II, for instance, is in company with many of the antebellum presidents.

Let me say this. I consider Truman one of the worst human beings for his dropping atomic bombs on largely civilian populations, and I despise the fact Eisenhower overthrew the Iranian government using the Cia; however I personally believe the 16 year span from Harry Truman's presidency through Eisenhower's presidency was one of the most successful periods in American's history in many different aspects.

I voted for Jimmy Carter, but this is a pretty bad group of presidents to choose from. Carter is to be applauded for appointing Paul Volker to the Federal Reserves and the establishment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. While FISA was later abused it's establishment was, none the less, a good thing in terms of curtailing CIA and NSA abuse of foreign surveillance. 

I would agree that Nixon was a pretty good president aside from Watergate.  As for me, I chose Reagan because he cut taxes (promoting economic growth) and helped end the Cold War peacefully.  FDR's leadership during World War II was great, and, looking at it objectively, I would consider him our third-greatest president (behing Lincoln and Washington, respectively), but even many liberal historians acknowledge that the New Deal didn't end the Great Depression.  Most believe World War II ended it, which I don't entirely agree with, but even one of my history professors said that the New Deal didn't get us out of the Depression, and she happens to be quite liberal.

The alternatives were:

*Blockade Japan until they starved into submission. Millions of Japanese citizens die as the war continues.
*Invade Japan. Millions of Allied and possibly tens of millions of Japanese soldiers and civilians die.

I agree.  I believe using the atomic bomb was the right decision because had we not used it, the war in the Pacific would have gone on indefinitely, at a potentially greater loss of life.  Though it was certainly not an ideal option, it was the simplest and quickest way to defeat Japan.  As for Jimmy Carter, he was always a great man, but he was one of our worst, if not the worst, president since WWII, and hands down the worst in the past 50 years.

Or accept the Japanese conditions for surrender which had been offered since late 1944 (i.e. guaranteeing that the Emperor would not lose his throne).

Bush?

I was always under that impression. I've always maintained that the Japanese were willing to surrender as long as they kept their monarchy; whiles Truman not only wanted them to disintegrate their monarchy but also wanted to use the Atomic bomb as a way to demonstrate American power to the Soviets. Whether or not that's true, doesn't change the fact that dropping atoms bombs on largely civilian populations is a war crime, plain and simple. If that isn't a war crime then what can honestly be considered a war crime? Or is it just another set of rules that is enforced differently when it affects western nations?

Looking at it objectively, you've got to admit that Bush did a pretty good job considering what was handed to him (i.e. 9/11, Iraq, Hurricane Katrina).  Some mistakes were made in all of those areas and others (esp. Katrina), but keep that in mind.

Handed to him? He caused one of them and failed to prevent another, and you have Afghanistan, habeas corpus, PATRIOT Act, domestic spying, torture, etc, etc, etc, all of which were caused by him, not handed to him.

Well if you're talking about failure to put 9/11 I always have to split the blame for that, between Clinton and Bush considering both had intel and opportunities to take out Osama prior to the incident.

Yeah, though I tend to allocate a bigger chunk to Bush than Clinton (like 60-40 or 70-30), just because of Bush being chronologically closer to it.

Easily, easily Franklin Roosevelt. There's literally no one else who even comes close.