Who was the "truest" Liberal?

[DevotedDemocrat]

Out of all the Presidents who could be called Liberal historically, who are the ones who were truly Liberal in their own personal ideology and not just Liberal for political pragmatism? Basically, Presidents who were "true believers" and not just Liberal because it was politically expedient to be.

Presidents who IMO could be called Liberal in today's politcal climate:
-Theodore Roosevelt
-William H. Taft
-Woodrow Wilson
-Franklin D. Roosevelt
-Harry S. Truman
-Dwight D. Eisenhower
-John F. Kennedy
-Lyndon B. Johnson
-Richard M. Nixon
-Gerald Ford
-Jimmy Carter
-Barack Obama

[Mechaman]

ITT this is a really cute thread.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

As I've long maintained, Thomas Jefferson of course. Well, it could be Andrew Jackson...

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Probably FDR.  Certainly not LBJ, as he only supported the CRA and VRA for political expediency.  I could see a case for JFK or Wilson, but since FDR is such a liberal hero now, I think he would be it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It might actually be Obama, funnily.

I'm pretty sure LBJ was a genuine supporter of the war on poverty and the Welfare State, but he certainly had his flaws with regard to Civil Rights and even more so with foreign policy. FDR grew to become a "true believer" (as his 1944 "economic bill of rights" shows), but he was initially a pragmatist. Not sure about Truman. Clinton, Carter and Eisenhower were moderates.

[Ichabod]

Probably FDR.  Certainly not LBJ, as he only supported the CRA and VRA for political expediency.  I could see a case for JFK or Wilson, but since FDR is such a liberal hero now, I think he would be it.

So Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and is just a political pig meanwhile Wilson was a ardent segregationist and is a true liberal, can you explain me that?

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Probably FDR.  Certainly not LBJ, as he only supported the CRA and VRA for political expediency.  I could see a case for JFK or Wilson, but since FDR is such a liberal hero now, I think he would be it.

So Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and is just a political pig meanwhile Wilson was a ardent segregationist and is a true liberal, can you explain me that?

The litany of progressive legislation passed in his first term and his visionary foreign policy may figure in that.

[Napoleon]

Well, if this isn't trolling.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Napoleon, meet Oldiesfreak. He has his Civil Rights history all wrong, and needs a class on it. He has been saying these things for almost as long as he has been here.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Napoleon, meet Oldiesfreak. He has his Civil Rights history all wrong, and needs a class on it. He has been saying these things for almost as long as he has been here.

I have enjoyed my many, many classes and studies on civil rights.  It is an undisputed fact that Johnson signed the CRA only for political gain.  Shortly after signing it, he said the following to Southern governors:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When he nominated Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court, he said this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As a Senator, he said this about the 1957 Civil Rights Act:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Source: http://www.fdfny.org/blog/2011/09/18/these-uppity-negroes-lbj/

[Ichabod]

"Undisputed fact". So then, why nobody else believes that except you? BTW, if signing the CRA and the VRA was just political opportunism, why didn't he sign the Souther Manifesto? That could be actually very risky if he looked for the relection for Texas.

[Velasco]

Was Richard M Nixon a true liberal or in another meaning of the word? Was he excessive in his liberality perhaps? The lavishness of my praise wouldn't be enough to do justice to some dedicated champions of the noble cause of the Civil Rights and their undisputed facts.

[The Mikado]

...OP, what exactly do you think that liberal means?  Treating the above list like they're on the same page of any sort of conceptual ideological framework is making my head hurt.

[Phony Moderate]

In the American sense? FDR.

In the European sense? Taft or Ford.

[TNF]

Franklin Roosevelt, undoubtedly.

[Dr. Cynic]

Probably FDR.  Certainly not LBJ, as he only supported the CRA and VRA for political expediency.  I could see a case for JFK or Wilson, but since FDR is such a liberal hero now, I think he would be it.

So Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and is just a political pig meanwhile Wilson was a ardent segregationist and is a true liberal, can you explain me that?

Johnson didn't lift a goddamn finger to pass it. He let Hubert Humphrey, who was still a Senator, do all the work in passing it. Humphrey divided the pro-civil rights forces into teams and it was Humphrey or any of his team captains (made up of both Democrats and Republicans) who made sure the quorum calls were made by extremely tired Senators during the southern filibuster. Johnson didn't lift a finger. He didn't make any calls or use the infamous "Johnson treatment" on anyone. Frankly, Johnson probably, at best, did not really care if the Civil Rights Act passed, but he sure was gonna jump on the bandwagon though and sign the bill for political expediency. Lyndon Johnson was just as racist as Wilson was.

[Vlad the Imperial]

Definitly NOT jefferson, probably Carter or Clinton

[nolesfan2011]

Out of all the Presidents who could be called Liberal historically, who are the ones who were truly Liberal in their own personal ideology and not just Liberal for political pragmatism? Basically, Presidents who were "true believers" and not just Liberal because it was politically expedient to be.

Presidents who IMO could be called Liberal in today's politcal climate:
-Theodore Roosevelt
-William H. Taft
-Woodrow Wilson
-Franklin D. Roosevelt
-Harry S. Truman
-Dwight D. Eisenhower
-John F. Kennedy
-Lyndon B. Johnson
-Richard M. Nixon
-Gerald Ford
-Jimmy Carter
-Barack Obama

TR was economically liberal, but socially and FP wise no.
Taft, Ike, Ford and perhaps Truman were just practical, but not personally liberal in most aspects, throw in Nixon too (who had some liberal economic policies and created the EPA and stuff).

Obama is not liberal, except in an authoritarian sense and is to the right of Reagan practically.

Wilson was "paternal" and liked remaking things but yes very racist and extremely authoritarian, plus he was a WASP so def not liberal.

JFK was a silver spoon guy but he was socially liberal (the affairs and such).

LBJ and FDR were ideological partners pretty much, and I would consider them both the most true personal liberals, they both were not moral prudes (affairs, smoking, drinking, cursing pretty much with ease). Neither were notably racist for the era they were in and both tended to have an economic and social justice complex that was crafted because of their life experiences.

LBJ developed a lot of economic and social justice humility because he didn't grow up wealthy and all through his youth/young adult life he was around a lot of poor people from the other side of the tracks (he taught underprivileged Mexican immigrant school kids out of college, in a racist era even).

FDR basically got the same because when he got polo and went to recuperate in Warm Springs and such he was also around the "common people", people who were maybe not as personally wealthy as him, but were afflicted by the same ailment of polo that brought them all down. 

Carter is what I would call a Christian Liberal, he mixes both his humble rural upbringing in Plains (again with the common people, both white and black just trying to make a living) with gospel based ideology on how to treat others and giving to the poor and helping the sick and that sort of thing.  He obviously isn't a super big social liberal (conservative baptist after all) but economically and fp wise yes, he seems to show genuine concern for people hurting and in need and downtrodden.   

[traininthedistance]

Benjamin Harrison deserves a mention here as well.

[Sergzov]

I think Theodore Roosevelt is the most Liberal president .

[H. Ross Peron]

Benjamin Harrison deserves a mention here as well.

I don't see how a protectionist, imperialist, Gilded Age Republican is remotely a "liberal" either in the classical or modern sense.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Definitly NOT jefferson, probably Carter or Clinton

Heh. Who was the one that practically founded public education in the state of Virginia? Fought first for dis-establishment of religion in the same state? Stood against the banks and moneyed industrial interests that would have seen fit to bend the government towards there interests?Opposed an obtrusive federal government that would hamper the common man?

Benjamin Harrison deserves a mention here as well.

I don't see how a protectionist, imperialist, Gilded Age Republican is remotely a "liberal" either in the classical or modern sense.

C'mon General. You know none of that matters as long as you pursued destructive pro-silver monetary policies.

[Enderman]

I'd have to say its Ford

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Probably FDR.  Certainly not LBJ, as he only supported the CRA and VRA for political expediency.

You're just like a broken vinyl, aren't you?

If LBJ supported something due to political expediency, it were his Southern colleagues when he was a Senator. I mean, he was from Texas, which wouldn't elect an all-out integrationist.

I've read many sources stating LBJ was rather personally sensitive to the plights of minorities. He did not grew up in a racist home (his father, a state legislation, was fighting with the KKK machine).

The funniest part, even if we assume he supported the CRA and VRA for political expediency, he still did more for the Afircan American's rights than any Republican President post-Grant.

You love to talk about how much you care about Blacks, so maybe you should give him a little credit, you little hack?

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

If anything, LBJ was against civil rights for political expediency during his time in the senate. He really did care about blacks, he just couldn't show it while he was a senator. In 1964, he had no fear of getting re-elected; so he did it then.