Opinion of Franklin D Roosevelt
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:37:12 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Opinion of Franklin D Roosevelt
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Poll
Question: What do you think of Franklin D Roosevelt
#1
Good President
 
#2
Great President
 
#3
Bad President
 
#4
Very Bad President
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 54

Author Topic: Opinion of Franklin D Roosevelt  (Read 8743 times)
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 25, 2011, 05:39:05 AM »

It makes one so depressed to think how far we have fallen since then.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 25, 2011, 07:21:30 AM »

I disagreed with his Court plan (He simply could've pressured them to retire)
I would hope no president could pressure a Justice into anything.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 25, 2011, 07:39:24 AM »

I love how like some people (and it's hilarious who) are saying FDR will get a bad score because *gasp* this forum is lurking with libertarians.

I mean talk about deluded.

Then again, as we can see with evangelicals it is usually members of the majority who like to purport to not being the majority.

Think I'm wrong?  Check back on this thread in five days times and see how many "THOSE WERE DAYS IN PARADISE!!!!!" posts compared to "OMG!!!! EVIL FASCIST!!!!!" posts are in this thread.


There are almost as many "Very Bad President " votes in this thread as there are for "Great President".

Yeah because voting results after only three hours are clearly indicative of this forum's demographics as a whole..........

Also, last time I checked the poll results 60% of this forum believes FDR was either "good" or "great".  You wanna know what 60% also correlates with?

Oh yeah, that's right........



Oh how hatefully libertarian this forum is if FDR does almost as well on here as he did IRL!!!!

OMFGosh!!!!!!

A majority of Americans loved FDR.

A majority of this forum loves FDR.

.....

Your point?

You were arguing that the forum is littered with libertarians who would skew the results.

From what I've gathered it is (at the very least) there with the American average.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,086
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 25, 2011, 08:06:15 AM »

Weird that a lefty would change the goal posts midway through a discussion about libertarians.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 25, 2011, 09:53:37 AM »

FDR wasn't God. He was a man with his flaws, made mistakes as everyone else, but certainly was one of the very best Presidents in history.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 25, 2011, 10:18:09 AM »
« Edited: October 25, 2011, 10:22:55 AM by Cult of Personality »

Meh, he wasn't the greatest president.  And as much criticism as I may get from like minded individuals he definitely wasn't the worst (in my opinion Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Benjamin Harrison, Woodrow Wilson, Herbert Hoover, Richard "the Dick" Nixon, and George W. Bush could probably be in the grand tournament for the worst.  FDR probably ranks somewhere in the high twenties-mid thirties).  However, his record of accomplishments is probably equaled only by George Washington (that isn't to say, however, that all accomplishments should be viewed positively).

That isn't to say, however, that I approve of all of his policies and accomplishments.  In fact a good many deal of them fall too easily into the pro-government growth and expansion side.  As a libertarian it would be ideologically inconsistent for me to call the President who made government intervention sexy a "good president".  Sure, FDR wasn't all bad (and might as well be a f***ing boy scout next to his predecessor Wilson, the scum of humanity) with his administration's efforts to defeat protectionism as an effective force in the US and the repeal of Prohibition.  The internment camps though.........yuck.

So yeah, bad president it is.
Logged
The Mikado
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,678


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 25, 2011, 11:40:25 AM »

Honestly, "Great" comes packaged with so many horrible connotations that I feel "good" is a better tribute.  "Great" people devour their subjects and slaughter the innocent to appease their own vanity.  Calling a leader "Great" is about the worst insults I can imagine.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 25, 2011, 12:35:21 PM »

All in all, FDR was the right man, in the right place, at the right time. He is an example of just how important having a good temperament is when it comes to serving as POTUS.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 25, 2011, 01:04:34 PM »

I'm not sure if the majority of this forum should be "interned" or merely shipped off the the GULag after being released from their Nazi slave labor camps.  I should certainly hope they aren't lynched first; Frankie sure knew where to draw the line on what kind of bills are unconstitutional!  Let's just hope nobody here mixes with the Yellow race.
Logged
CatoMinor
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,007
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 25, 2011, 01:06:18 PM »

Very Bad President
Logged
Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook
The Obamanation
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,853
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 25, 2011, 02:38:31 PM »

Mech's username is fitting right now, concidering FDR has/had a MASSIVE Cult of Personality.

Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 25, 2011, 02:51:25 PM »

He was a good president except near the end, when he refused to step down earlier than he did.  If Truman had been at Potsdam, things would have been better for the following 50 years. 
Logged
Insula Dei
belgiansocialist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
Belgium


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 25, 2011, 03:24:48 PM »

He was a good president except near the end, when he refused to step down earlier than he did.  If Truman had been at Potsdam, things would have been better for the following 50 years. 

You mean the rabid anti-communist Truman? I'm quite sure that FDR, one of the only foreign politicians who Stalin genuinely respected, was very much the right man for dealing with the USSR at that point in time. Truman would only have antagonized the Soviets and would probably have destroyed any chance of Soviet concessions on even the most minor of issues. Bear in mind that at Potsdam Stalin was negotiating from a position of great strength.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 25, 2011, 03:29:32 PM »

I'm always quite torn with regards to this Roosevelt. A lot of what he did was necessary and he certainly did a much better job than the Presidents serving before and after him. But a lot of it was also excessive and contributes to problems we're still having today. The entire concept of the federal government was altered by FDR for better and worse. Overall, I can't really blame him for what he did in response to the nonsense that led to the mess he had to clean up. AND a lot of what he accomplished probably couldn't have been by anyone else. I just don't know. Mildly positive overall, I guess.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 25, 2011, 03:58:51 PM »

He was a good president except near the end, when he refused to step down earlier than he did.  If Truman had been at Potsdam, things would have been better for the following 50 years. 

You mean the rabid anti-communist Truman? I'm quite sure that FDR, one of the only foreign politicians who Stalin genuinely respected, was very much the right man for dealing with the USSR at that point in time. Truman would only have antagonized the Soviets and would probably have destroyed any chance of Soviet concessions on even the most minor of issues. Bear in mind that at Potsdam Stalin was negotiating from a position of great strength.

Damn, I meant Yalta.  Post-war borders of Poland and Germany and such.  Anyway, Truman wouldn't have agreed to all that. 
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 25, 2011, 06:54:30 PM »

Good president...

Clearly the cons: the court-stacking and the Japanese internment camps...


Pros: Regardless of what the right thinks of providing jobs and therefore money and food to people - it was effective. People forget that he tried to roll-back some of the reforms due to Budgetary pressures in 1937... and the unemployment rate shot up by about 7% in a year.

I think too many get lost in their own Ideological bog when it comes to FDR - but in 1933... "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" was not going to fix 25% unemployment and 25% underemployment. It was massive, and it wasn't going to be fixed any time soon - but on the other side, the economy didn't recover until mass-production was required in WWII... even then... it was for the military... so still 'Government' jobs Tongue
Logged
Cincinnatus
JBach717
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,092
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 25, 2011, 07:12:40 PM »

He was a good president except near the end, when he refused to step down earlier than he did.  If Truman had been at Potsdam, things would have been better for the following 50 years. 

You mean the rabid anti-communist Truman? I'm quite sure that FDR, one of the only foreign politicians who Stalin genuinely respected, was very much the right man for dealing with the USSR at that point in time. Truman would only have antagonized the Soviets and would probably have destroyed any chance of Soviet concessions on even the most minor of issues. Bear in mind that at Potsdam Stalin was negotiating from a position of great strength.

Did Stalin really respect him?  I think Stalin believed he could easily control the President, and had little regard for him as a person.  The fact that a mutual goal existed between the two helped quite a bit as well.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 25, 2011, 07:20:44 PM »



I disagree with you about Roosevelt, but I love your signature.  Very droll.  I might steal it.

Logged
Roemerista
MQuinn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 935
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.39, S: 5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 25, 2011, 07:22:01 PM »

I am in the camp that views his policies as lengthening the great depression. I do not view  it as specific as the UCLA economists who felt that it was lengthened by seven years, but certainly it as harmful.

On the plus side he did bring us the story of the fake Nazi map of South America, that wonderful bit of work by the Brits' own Ivar Bryce.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 25, 2011, 07:23:11 PM »

I am in the camp that views his policies as lengthening the great depression. I do not view  it as specific as the UCLA economists who felt that it was lengthened by seven years, but certainly it as harmful.

On the plus side he did bring us the story of the fake Nazi map of South America, that wonderful bit of work by the Brits' own Ivar Bryce.

Could you provide a link?
Logged
Insula Dei
belgiansocialist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
Belgium


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 25, 2011, 07:32:49 PM »

He was a good president except near the end, when he refused to step down earlier than he did.  If Truman had been at Potsdam, things would have been better for the following 50 years. 

You mean the rabid anti-communist Truman? I'm quite sure that FDR, one of the only foreign politicians who Stalin genuinely respected, was very much the right man for dealing with the USSR at that point in time. Truman would only have antagonized the Soviets and would probably have destroyed any chance of Soviet concessions on even the most minor of issues. Bear in mind that at Potsdam Stalin was negotiating from a position of great strength.

Did Stalin really respect him?  I think Stalin believed he could easily control the President, and had little regard for him as a person.  The fact that a mutual goal existed between the two helped quite a bit as well.

With Stalin the notion 'respecting' is to be applied with all possible caveats, obviously. But he and FDR did have something going that Stalin and Churchill just plain did not, and the arrival of Attlee didn't affect USSR-GB relations like the arrival of Truman did USSR-US relations.

Stalin trusted FDR at the very least. Also, FDR had delivered on the 2nd front promise, even if that had happened much too late for Stalin's liking. And FDR wasn't trying to fug the USSR over at every step of the way, like Churchill was. On the other hand of course, the fact that FDR often appeared to be the most 'naive' of the Big Three must have helped Stalin to come to the point of trusting him. Churchill was the sort of ally you could have a Molotov-Eden agreement with, but you could not trust him once he was out of sight (cf. Operation 'Unthinkable').

As far as the mutual goal between the US and the USSR is concerned, we must not forget that Stalin and Roosevelt not only both wanted to defeat the Axis-powers, they also both wanted to end the European colonial empires (mainly in Asia).
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 25, 2011, 07:44:38 PM »

Overrated HP with good intentions.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 25, 2011, 08:07:48 PM »

The greatest President of the 20th Century; only Lincoln and Washington surpass him.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 25, 2011, 08:24:09 PM »

He was a good president except near the end, when he refused to step down earlier than he did.  If Truman had been at Potsdam, things would have been better for the following 50 years. 

You mean the rabid anti-communist Truman? I'm quite sure that FDR, one of the only foreign politicians who Stalin genuinely respected, was very much the right man for dealing with the USSR at that point in time. Truman would only have antagonized the Soviets and would probably have destroyed any chance of Soviet concessions on even the most minor of issues. Bear in mind that at Potsdam Stalin was negotiating from a position of great strength.

Did Stalin really respect him?  I think Stalin believed he could easily control the President, and had little regard for him as a person.  The fact that a mutual goal existed between the two helped quite a bit as well.

With Stalin the notion 'respecting' is to be applied with all possible caveats, obviously. But he and FDR did have something going that Stalin and Churchill just plain did not, and the arrival of Attlee didn't affect USSR-GB relations like the arrival of Truman did USSR-US relations.

Stalin trusted FDR at the very least. Also, FDR had delivered on the 2nd front promise, even if that had happened much too late for Stalin's liking. And FDR wasn't trying to fug the USSR over at every step of the way, like Churchill was. On the other hand of course, the fact that FDR often appeared to be the most 'naive' of the Big Three must have helped Stalin to come to the point of trusting him. Churchill was the sort of ally you could have a Molotov-Eden agreement with, but you could not trust him once he was out of sight (cf. Operation 'Unthinkable').

As far as the mutual goal between the US and the USSR is concerned, we must not forget that Stalin and Roosevelt not only both wanted to defeat the Axis-powers, they also both wanted to end the European colonial empires (mainly in Asia).


Alright, here's my two cents.  He was sick.  Very sick.  And by the time Yalta came along, he suffered frequent lapses of consciousness, seizures, and lapses of memory.  For several years before his death, and certainly in Tehran and Yalta, he was hemorrhaging in the brain.  He was tired all the time.  His physicians ordered him to rest, but he ignored those orders.  He knew what was going on, and he knew he was dying, but he pressed his service.  Some would call that commendable.  I can respect that.  But he should have passed the torch earlier.  He should have put Harry in charge.  Harry wasn't afraid to nuke Japan, and Harry wasn't afraid to speak roughly to Stalin.  Harry doesn't mind if he doesn't make the scene.  He's got a daytime job, he's doing alright.  He can play the honky-tonk like anything.  Savin' it up for Friday night.

Anyway, Harry wouldn't have allowed Stalin such advantage at Potsdam if Roosevelt hadn't set it all up at Yalta. 

I'm not saying Roosevelt wasn't great and good (I voted good because, as Mechaman said, "great" implies bigness.  As in, seven is greater than six.  Six is less than seven.  And they're all big.  Even Obama.  Whether you agree with him or not, he's big.  Not Jesus huge, or Elvis huge, or even FDR huge, but big nevertheless.  But good is special, and is reserved for those like FDR.)  He was bold during the depression and bold during the war.  But near the end he was a bit megalomaniacal, and I think that hurt the cause.  I think the Poles and the Germans and others suffered needless under the yoke of the Warsaw pact in a way that was greater than if Truman had been in charge starting from about late 1944.  And, given that Roosevelt understood how ill he was, and how his illness was affecting his job, there's a little stain on his record near the end.  At least that's my opinion. 
Logged
Insula Dei
belgiansocialist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,326
Belgium


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 25, 2011, 08:26:21 PM »

I don't really see what you think Truman could have done that FDR didn't do. The Red Army occupied (or at Jalta: was about to occupy) Poland, and the rest of the East Bloc. When (a)your opponent has troops on the ground, (b) your opponent thinks the issue at hand at least as important as you do and (c) you're not ready to go for all out warfare, you're in a very weak position diplomatically. Any concessions that the US was going to get out of the USSR would have to be gotten the soft way, rather than with hard words.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.066 seconds with 14 queries.