Opinion of Richard Nixon (by party)

[bedstuy]

I think people like old terrible Presidents for two reasons.  One, they're usually troubled, rich characters, almost Shakespearian in their twisted web of arrogance and lies.  Two, if you like a terrible President more than a current politician, it shows how super-duper-mega upset you are. 

But, obviously, Nixon was a terrible President.  Nixon did a few good things for the wrong reasons and because we operated out of a Keynesian economic policy consensus.  Take the Clean Air Act.  Why did Nixon sign the CAA?  Because the expected Democratic candidate in 1972, Ed Muskie, was a huge environmentalist.  Nixon just wanted to take his signature issue off the table to aid the Nixon reelection campaign in 1972.  So, those good things would have happened under any President and what Nixon did wrong was basically destroy the American presidency as an institution.

And, talk to any high profile activist from the 1970s, they can tell you what a wire-tap sounds like. 

More liberal than Obama. FF

Wait, I just remembered he's more liberal than Obama, so FF

That's categorically false to the point of being ridiculous.  More liberal than today's Republicans does not mean more liberal than Barack Obama. 

[Mechaman]

I think people like old terrible Presidents for two reasons.  One, they're usually troubled, rich characters, almost Shakespearian in their twisted web of arrogance and lies.  Two, if you like a terrible President more than a current politician, it shows how super-duper-mega upset you are. 

But, obviously, Nixon was a terrible President.  Nixon did a few good things for the wrong reasons and because we operated out of a Keynesian economic policy consensus.  Take the Clean Air Act.  Why did Nixon sign the CAA?  Because the expected Democratic candidate in 1972, Ed Muskie, was a huge environmentalist.  Nixon just wanted to take his signature issue off the table to aid the Nixon reelection campaign in 1972.  So, those good things would have happened under any President and what Nixon did wrong was basically destroy the American presidency as an institution.

And, talk to any high profile activist from the 1970s, they can tell you what a wire-tap sounds like. 

More liberal than Obama. FF

Wait, I just remembered he's more liberal than Obama, so FF

That's categorically false to the point of being ridiculous.  More liberal than today's Republicans does not mean more liberal than Barack Obama. 

To be fair, SWE was mocking the apologist crowd.

[SWE]

Anyway, now that I got that off of my chest I will just say that this thread, and the apologist posts I've seen so far (especially from Democrats who insist that Nixon was "not that bad") all show what is wrong with America.  If you purposefully sabotage peace talks of a war that has already killed millions just so you can win the presidency, you are not a sympathetic figure by any means.  If you then give the finger to people who voted for you expecting an eventual exit from the war theater instead of mass bombings that kill even more innocent bystanders, you are not a sympathetic figure.

You see, I could give a rat's ass about Watergate.  Nixon's real crime was that he didn't think twice about how many lives he needed to destroy to advance his political career.  ANd that in my mind far outshadows the EPA, peace talks with China, his push for universal healthcare (conveniently done right before he got kicked out of office), anti-missile treaties, desegregation, etc. etc.  Oh yeah, he also began the so-called "War on Drugs", which has become the New Jim Crow for the African American community.

So yes, fuck Richard Nixon.  He's easily in the top five of the worst presidents we ever had.  A decade ago or so in high school it was almost accepted as common fact that Richard Nixon was a horrible terrible guy by both Republicans and Democrats.  Nowdays it seems that moderate heroes in both parties seem to be wanting to give his dead corpse a handjob and a nice thumbs up for "not being as bad as (insert later Republican President here)."  As much as I hate Reagan and Dubya, their pathetic kill scores pale in comparison to the amount that died just so that Dick Nixon could have (or attempt to have, given Watergate) his precious two terms in office.

Enthusiastic HP vote here.  And seriously, fuck you to every single one of you who voted FF.

Mechaman why do you oppose the epa?

[Cory]

Anyway, now that I got that off of my chest I will just say that this thread, and the apologist posts I've seen so far (especially from Democrats who insist that Nixon was "not that bad") all show what is wrong with America.  If you purposefully sabotage peace talks of a war that has already killed millions just so you can win the presidency, you are not a sympathetic figure by any means.  If you then give the finger to people who voted for you expecting an eventual exit from the war theater instead of mass bombings that kill even more innocent bystanders, you are not a sympathetic figure.

Finally someone brings it up. I wish more people knew about this.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21768668

It begins in the summer of 1968. Nixon feared a breakthrough at the Paris Peace talks designed to find a negotiated settlement to the Vietnam war, and he knew this would derail his campaign.

He therefore set up a clandestine back-channel involving Anna Chennault, a senior campaign adviser.

At a July meeting in Nixon's New York apartment, the South Vietnamese ambassador was told Chennault represented Nixon and spoke for the campaign. If any message needed to be passed to the South Vietnamese president, Nguyen Van Thieu, it would come via Chennault.

In late October 1968 there were major concessions from Hanoi which promised to allow meaningful talks to get underway in Paris - concessions that would justify Johnson calling for a complete bombing halt of North Vietnam. This was exactly what Nixon feared.

Chennault was despatched to the South Vietnamese embassy with a clear message: the South Vietnamese government should withdraw from the talks, refuse to deal with Johnson, and if Nixon was elected, they would get a much better deal.

So on the eve of his planned announcement of a halt to the bombing, Johnson learned the South Vietnamese were pulling out.

He was also told why. The FBI had bugged the ambassador's phone and a transcripts of Anna Chennault's calls were sent to the White House. In one conversation she tells the ambassador to "just hang on through election".

Johnson was told by Defence Secretary Clifford that the interference was illegal and threatened the chance for peace.

Easily the single worst thing Nixon ever did. Watergate as we know it pales in comparison. I swear if I could go back and change the outcome of any election in America it would be 1968 by a mile.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

HP, but not as much of an HP as Democratic Nixon apologists.

I agree with Sanchez that Nixon wasn't entirely a monster of his own making, but it's stupid to blame the media for that. What was wrong with him clearly went back before his political career, far enough back that we end up looking at a part of his life that it would be hard to try to analyze without running smack-dab into Donald Winnicott...

Agreed, but I feel his relationship with the media enhanced the feeling of rejection. Had he just been elected and never had the hatred of the media, he might have felt vindicated by winning elections.

The media don't hate people at random though - they hate people who make themselves "hatable", and Nixon was exactly the kind of politicians who was very easy to hate. His entire political career was built on his denunciation of an "enemy" that must be fought, pitting Americans against each other. Even when nothing of his corruption was known, he already appeared as an incredibly nasty, spiteful person.

Anyway, now that I got that off of my chest I will just say that this thread, and the apologist posts I've seen so far (especially from Democrats who insist that Nixon was "not that bad") all show what is wrong with America.  If you purposefully sabotage peace talks of a war that has already killed millions just so you can win the presidency, you are not a sympathetic figure by any means.  If you then give the finger to people who voted for you expecting an eventual exit from the war theater instead of mass bombings that kill even more innocent bystanders, you are not a sympathetic figure.

You see, I could give a rat's ass about Watergate.  Nixon's real crime was that he didn't think twice about how many lives he needed to destroy to advance his political career.  ANd that in my mind far outshadows the EPA, peace talks with China, his push for universal healthcare (conveniently done right before he got kicked out of office), anti-missile treaties, desegregation, etc. etc.  Oh yeah, he also began the so-called "War on Drugs", which has become the New Jim Crow for the African American community.

So yes, fuck Richard Nixon.  He's easily in the top five of the worst presidents we ever had.  A decade ago or so in high school it was almost accepted as common fact that Richard Nixon was a horrible terrible guy by both Republicans and Democrats.  Nowdays it seems that moderate heroes in both parties seem to be wanting to give his dead corpse a handjob and a nice thumbs up for "not being as bad as (insert later Republican President here)."  As much as I hate Reagan and Dubya, their pathetic kill scores pale in comparison to the amount that died just so that Dick Nixon could have (or attempt to have, given Watergate) his precious two terms in office.

Enthusiastic HP vote here.  And seriously, fuck you to every single one of you who voted FF.

I know better than to try and challenge you on history....so I won't, as my ass will be whipped so bad that I won't be able to show my face (or R-FL avatar) here on this forum for a week. So I'm just gonna say this: there is some dark luster to Richard Nixon that I am attracted too. I don't know what it is.

[Mechaman]

HP, but not as much of an HP as Democratic Nixon apologists.

I agree with Sanchez that Nixon wasn't entirely a monster of his own making, but it's stupid to blame the media for that. What was wrong with him clearly went back before his political career, far enough back that we end up looking at a part of his life that it would be hard to try to analyze without running smack-dab into Donald Winnicott...

Agreed, but I feel his relationship with the media enhanced the feeling of rejection. Had he just been elected and never had the hatred of the media, he might have felt vindicated by winning elections.

The media don't hate people at random though - they hate people who make themselves "hatable", and Nixon was exactly the kind of politicians who was very easy to hate. His entire political career was built on his denunciation of an "enemy" that must be fought, pitting Americans against each other. Even when nothing of his corruption was known, he already appeared as an incredibly nasty, spiteful person.

Anyway, now that I got that off of my chest I will just say that this thread, and the apologist posts I've seen so far (especially from Democrats who insist that Nixon was "not that bad") all show what is wrong with America.  If you purposefully sabotage peace talks of a war that has already killed millions just so you can win the presidency, you are not a sympathetic figure by any means.  If you then give the finger to people who voted for you expecting an eventual exit from the war theater instead of mass bombings that kill even more innocent bystanders, you are not a sympathetic figure.

You see, I could give a rat's ass about Watergate.  Nixon's real crime was that he didn't think twice about how many lives he needed to destroy to advance his political career.  ANd that in my mind far outshadows the EPA, peace talks with China, his push for universal healthcare (conveniently done right before he got kicked out of office), anti-missile treaties, desegregation, etc. etc.  Oh yeah, he also began the so-called "War on Drugs", which has become the New Jim Crow for the African American community.

So yes, fuck Richard Nixon.  He's easily in the top five of the worst presidents we ever had.  A decade ago or so in high school it was almost accepted as common fact that Richard Nixon was a horrible terrible guy by both Republicans and Democrats.  Nowdays it seems that moderate heroes in both parties seem to be wanting to give his dead corpse a handjob and a nice thumbs up for "not being as bad as (insert later Republican President here)."  As much as I hate Reagan and Dubya, their pathetic kill scores pale in comparison to the amount that died just so that Dick Nixon could have (or attempt to have, given Watergate) his precious two terms in office.

Enthusiastic HP vote here.  And seriously, fuck you to every single one of you who voted FF.

I know better than to try and challenge you on history....so I won't, as my ass will be whipped so bad that I won't be able to show my face (or R-FL avatar) here on this forum for a week. So I'm just gonna say this: there is some dark luster to Richard Nixon that I am attracted too. I don't know what it is.

Well I don't recall you voting FF, so you're off the hook for now.

[Mechaman]

Anyway, now that I got that off of my chest I will just say that this thread, and the apologist posts I've seen so far (especially from Democrats who insist that Nixon was "not that bad") all show what is wrong with America.  If you purposefully sabotage peace talks of a war that has already killed millions just so you can win the presidency, you are not a sympathetic figure by any means.  If you then give the finger to people who voted for you expecting an eventual exit from the war theater instead of mass bombings that kill even more innocent bystanders, you are not a sympathetic figure.

Finally someone brings it up. I wish more people knew about this.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21768668

It begins in the summer of 1968. Nixon feared a breakthrough at the Paris Peace talks designed to find a negotiated settlement to the Vietnam war, and he knew this would derail his campaign.

He therefore set up a clandestine back-channel involving Anna Chennault, a senior campaign adviser.

At a July meeting in Nixon's New York apartment, the South Vietnamese ambassador was told Chennault represented Nixon and spoke for the campaign. If any message needed to be passed to the South Vietnamese president, Nguyen Van Thieu, it would come via Chennault.

In late October 1968 there were major concessions from Hanoi which promised to allow meaningful talks to get underway in Paris - concessions that would justify Johnson calling for a complete bombing halt of North Vietnam. This was exactly what Nixon feared.

Chennault was despatched to the South Vietnamese embassy with a clear message: the South Vietnamese government should withdraw from the talks, refuse to deal with Johnson, and if Nixon was elected, they would get a much better deal.

So on the eve of his planned announcement of a halt to the bombing, Johnson learned the South Vietnamese were pulling out.

He was also told why. The FBI had bugged the ambassador's phone and a transcripts of Anna Chennault's calls were sent to the White House. In one conversation she tells the ambassador to "just hang on through election".

Johnson was told by Defence Secretary Clifford that the interference was illegal and threatened the chance for peace.

Easily the single worst thing Nixon ever did. Watergate as we know it pales in comparison. I swear if I could go back and change the outcome of any election in America it would be 1968 by a mile.

Yes.

Richard Nixon was America's Josef Stalin.  There shouldn't be any debate about how horrible this guy is.

[Antonio the Sixth]

FTR, I agree that Nixon was a very complex and interesting man as well.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

HP, but not as much of an HP as Democratic Nixon apologists.

I agree with Sanchez that Nixon wasn't entirely a monster of his own making, but it's stupid to blame the media for that. What was wrong with him clearly went back before his political career, far enough back that we end up looking at a part of his life that it would be hard to try to analyze without running smack-dab into Donald Winnicott...

Agreed, but I feel his relationship with the media enhanced the feeling of rejection. Had he just been elected and never had the hatred of the media, he might have felt vindicated by winning elections.

The media don't hate people at random though - they hate people who make themselves "hatable", and Nixon was exactly the kind of politicians who was very easy to hate. His entire political career was built on his denunciation of an "enemy" that must be fought, pitting Americans against each other. Even when nothing of his corruption was known, he already appeared as an incredibly nasty, spiteful person.

Anyway, now that I got that off of my chest I will just say that this thread, and the apologist posts I've seen so far (especially from Democrats who insist that Nixon was "not that bad") all show what is wrong with America.  If you purposefully sabotage peace talks of a war that has already killed millions just so you can win the presidency, you are not a sympathetic figure by any means.  If you then give the finger to people who voted for you expecting an eventual exit from the war theater instead of mass bombings that kill even more innocent bystanders, you are not a sympathetic figure.

You see, I could give a rat's ass about Watergate.  Nixon's real crime was that he didn't think twice about how many lives he needed to destroy to advance his political career.  ANd that in my mind far outshadows the EPA, peace talks with China, his push for universal healthcare (conveniently done right before he got kicked out of office), anti-missile treaties, desegregation, etc. etc.  Oh yeah, he also began the so-called "War on Drugs", which has become the New Jim Crow for the African American community.

So yes, fuck Richard Nixon.  He's easily in the top five of the worst presidents we ever had.  A decade ago or so in high school it was almost accepted as common fact that Richard Nixon was a horrible terrible guy by both Republicans and Democrats.  Nowdays it seems that moderate heroes in both parties seem to be wanting to give his dead corpse a handjob and a nice thumbs up for "not being as bad as (insert later Republican President here)."  As much as I hate Reagan and Dubya, their pathetic kill scores pale in comparison to the amount that died just so that Dick Nixon could have (or attempt to have, given Watergate) his precious two terms in office.

Enthusiastic HP vote here.  And seriously, fuck you to every single one of you who voted FF.

I know better than to try and challenge you on history....so I won't, as my ass will be whipped so bad that I won't be able to show my face (or R-FL avatar) here on this forum for a week. So I'm just gonna say this: there is some dark luster to Richard Nixon that I am attracted too. I don't know what it is.

Well I don't recall you voting FF, so you're off the hook for now.

I voted FF, though it was sort of a troll vote.....sorta. He was, as I mentioned, a terrible President. But like Cathcon said, I just can't root against him. I have to be mentally ill or something .

[Antonio the Sixth]

It make lots of sense for conservatives to like Nixon, considering that he did more to further conservative views into the mainstream than anyone else.

[Goldwater]

HP (R)

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Neutral (R).  Watergate is an obvious stain on his legacy, but other than that, he was an excellent president (and also one of our most intelligent.)  America is much better off today for having him in the White House then we would've been with Humphrey, Wallace, or McGovern, warts and all.

[SWE]

Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

You forget that if Oldiesfreak had been around in 1865 he would have said Lincoln had it coming.

[H. Ross Peron]

Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

You forget that if Oldiesfreak had been around in 1865 he would have said Lincoln had it coming.

1865 Oldies would have be an enthusiastic Democrat on the basis of the belief that in the future the Democrats will be support racial equality.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

You forget that if Oldiesfreak had been around in 1865 he would have said Lincoln had it coming.

1865 Oldies would have be an enthusiastic Democrat on the basis of the belief that in the future the Democrats will be support racial equality.

Wrong again. 

[AggregateDemand]

LBJ 2.0

Vote-buying, political scheming, Machiavellian dealing. Expanded the legacy of LBJ that continues to plague our country to this day.