Is there any former POTUS, living or dead, who wouldn't be appalled by Trump?

[Koharu]

They would still support him politically, these are people who were brought up in a society where women couldn't vote.

LOL.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.jofreeman.com/polhistory/1912.htm

[#StillWithHer]

They would still support him politically, these are people who were brought up in a society where women couldn't vote.

LOL.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I did not know that.

nationalcenter.org/TRooseveltMotherhood.html

But read this speech (I can't include links), it's patriarchal as those were the attitudes back then. So why would Presidents be culturally liberal and oppose Donald Trump?

[#StillWithHer]

And also, supporting the right of women to vote is the bare minimum to not be sexist...

[Koharu]

Honestly, they probably wouldn't have much issue with his sexism, though most would have issues with how flagrant he was in bragging about his escapades.

They would, however, dislike him based on his lack of education and willing ignorance. As I said previously, almost all presidents had a deeply ingrained respect for a willingness to learn. Even Bush Jr, who was seen by the public as "uneducated," reads almost vociferously. Trump doesn't care to do the work that is required to be president, and that would offend most of them.

I mean. My dad is 80. He doesn't particularly like gay people and has more conservative views in regards to women than most "modern" people. That said, he hates Trump's guts. He voted for Hillary. Many other in his generation also dislike Trump but held their noses and voted for him because of the supreme court (abortion). Previous presidents wouldn't have that reasoning. They would almost as a whole dislike him.

[Strudelcutie4427]

I think every president is appalled by things their successors do

[Badger]

I think every president is appalled by things their successors do

Cheap cop-out answer.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Strange as it might sound, transgenderism was actually relatively accepted long before homosexuality was. Gender reassignment surgery has been happening since the 30s. In fact, pre-Stonewall and for even some time after that, transgenderism was touted by some as a likely explanation for homosexuality, aka gay men were really trans women and lesbians were really trans men, with some gays being "encouraged" to transition. It's hardly a guarantee all pre-Stonewall presidents would've approved of Trump's military transgender ban.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

Andrew Jackson would admire Trump for his toughness and quasi Fascist authoritarianism. Trump being president in the 1820-1830's would also support the genocidal Indian removal.

[Mr. Smith]

If he had won, the answer would be fellow New Yorker Sam Tilden.

[Badger]

If he had won, the answer would be fellow New Yorker Sam Tilden.

Interesting. Can you elaborate? I'm only passing Lee familiar with Tilden, but I understand he was a reformer, so I'm not sure I see the connection.

[Santander]

Andrew Jackson would admire Trump for his toughness and quasi Fascist authoritarianism. Trump being president in the 1820-1830's would also support the genocidal Indian removal.

Andrew Jackson would've been appalled at Trump's weakness and poor physical shape.

[Badger]

Andrew Jackson would admire Trump for his toughness and quasi Fascist authoritarianism. Trump being president in the 1820-1830's would also support the genocidal Indian removal.

Andrew Jackson would've been appalled at Trump's weakness and poor physical shape.

On the contrary, for the time he would have been impressed than any 72 year old could be so spry and well-fed.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

And also, supporting the right of women to vote is the bare minimum to not be sexist...

Back in the day this wasn't necessarily true. The disenfranchisement of women stemmed from the root cause that the vote was given to those households with autonomy and control over property. So women, who largely were subordinate members of a household would not be in this chosen category. In fact, the latent suffrage movement grew from earlier women fighting for these elementary rights, and the consequent step of realising they were no longer a subordinate member of another household (in some cases because lower class women were becoming workers due to the Industrial Revolutions, in some because upper class women were starting to gain control of property). You can see this in some early women's rights activism, like when they were deeply divided of trying to put in language about "sex" in the 19th amendment and discussions about how far the suffrage should be extended and how soon it should be pushed for.

As for what the earlier presidents would have thought about women's rights, it's hard to say. All the Founders seemed to admire, say, Abigal Adams enough to view her as a wise councel. Although none of them (aside from Burr and Paine iirc) seemed to think very carefully about the subject, they were all intellectually curious men, who if popped into a time warp and entered into the future would probably reexamine their own prejudices (indeed, that seems to be a common theme in people like Jefferson, of speculating how their own lofty ideals squared with the reality they lived in).

As for trump? I'm pretty sure that some of the Gilded Age figures would recognise such a man as a fool and a glutton equivalent to some of the hated machine bosses like Tweed and the oligarchs. (Heck, if they were told Trump came from NYC some of them would assume Tammany was still around and he was the latest product).

[dw93]

Obviously the living Presidents don't think highly of him as none of them voted for him and that includes the two living Republican Presidents. I also wouldn't be surprised if in 2020 Dubya, just like in 2016, refused to endorse or vote for him.

As for the dead Presidents, they'd all have one reason or another to dislike him. I hope the dead Presidents are all beating the hell out of Nixon and Reagan for crafting the Southern Strategy and the Religious Right, as both of those led to Trump.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Andrew Johnson.

[Higgins]

They would still support him politically, these are people who were brought up in a society where women couldn't vote.

LOL.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I did not know that.

nationalcenter.org/TRooseveltMotherhood.html

But read this speech (I can't include links), it's patriarchal as those were the attitudes back then. So why would Presidents be culturally liberal and oppose Donald Trump?

As patriarchal as you feel that speech is, can you ever, ever in a million years see Trump saying something as respectful, or as loving of women as this part of it?:

"No ordinary work done by a man is either as hard or as responsible as the work of a woman who is bringing up a family of small children; for upon her time and strength demands are made not only every hour of the day but often every hour of the night. She may have to get up night after night to take care of a sick child, and yet must by day continue to do all her household duties as well; and if the family means are scant she must usually enjoy even her rare holidays taking her whole brood of children with her. The birth pangs make all men the debtors of all women. Above all our sympathy and regard are due to the struggling wives among those whom Abraham Lincoln called the plain people, and whom he so loved and trusted; for the lives of these women are often led on the lonely heights of quiet, self-sacrificing heroism."

Do you think Trump would ever have enough respect for women to understand how hard a woman's lot is?

Do not ever put TR in the same boat as Trump. TR loved his first wife desperately and respected her and put her on a painful pedestal for the rest of his life after she died. Do you think Trump has loved any of his wives?

"She was beautiful in face and form, and lovelier still in spirit; As a flower she grew, and as a fair young flower she died. Her life had been always in the sunshine; there had never come to her a single sorrow; and none ever knew her who did not love and revere her for the bright, sunny temper and her saintly unselfishness. Fair, pure, and joyous as a maiden; loving, tender, and happy. As a young wife; when she had just become a mother, when her life seemed to be just begun, and when the years seemed so bright before her—then, by a strange and terrible fate, death came to her. And when my heart’s dearest died, the light went from my life forever."

Trump could never appreciate a woman beyond the beauty of her face or the shape of her body. To Trump, those are the only things that make a woman worth anything.

[BlueSwan]

I think every last one of them would be appalled.

This is the correct answer.

[Mr. Smith]

Andrew Johnson.

That Johnson was a tailor who came from nothing and loathed the patrician class that Trump epitomizes.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Obviously the living Presidents don't think highly of him as none of them voted for him and that includes the two living Republican Presidents. I also wouldn't be surprised if in 2020 Dubya, just like in 2016, refused to endorse or vote for him.

As for the dead Presidents, they'd all have one reason or another to dislike him. I hope the dead Presidents are all beating the hell out of Nixon and Reagan for crafting the Southern Strategy and the Religious Right, as both of those led to Trump.

Perhaps we could get a Carter-George H.W. Bush National Sanity ticket running against Trump? (Not really serious, for several reasons, but it's a fun daydream compared to our current national nightmare.)

[pbrower2a]

I think every president is appalled by things their successors do

Which predecessor would Obama have appalled? Carter? GHWB? Clinton? Dubya? 

[emailking]

One of the things this discussion has shown, is that you would likely have to give a lot of these people a long explanation, or crash course, on modern society, including modern technology, modern forms of communication, cultural issues, global issues, history of wars we've been in, etc. And then, once they've gotten over the shock of all this knowledge, whether or not they like Trump may be the last thing they want to think about. If they were say, forced to study modern society or to live in modern society for an extended period of time, so that all these notions became normal to them, then who knows if they would even have the same views they once did.

[Brittain33]

I could see him fitting easily into Harding's world. Harding didn't sweat the details and liked the ladies and his rich businessmen friends.

[darklordoftech]

Trump's lack military service and his lack of experience before becoming President would alienate them all.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Nixon wouldn't love him.

Nixon would constantly call him a goddamn soft rich kid whose daughter was married to a goddamned Jew and who didn't know the first f**king thing about his goddamned job and dealt with Congress like a goddamned candy-ass pansy.

While I agree with this mostly, I also think Nixon would simultaneously have a great deal of admiration for Trump and what he did. Nixon, after all, respected businessmen who got up the nose of East Coast types.

To answer this question, it depends a lot on the context. I doubt Andrew Johnson would though, nor Warren Harding. But that's not a high point.

[Badger]

I sometimes hate these poles because they inevitably apply the 18th or 19th century values of the presidents at the time. In which case of course they're going to be appalled by the fact that blacks and women are property, that gays aren't literally subject to the death penalty, and that the propertied classes actually don't monopolize the vote. They probably be all freaked out buy television radio and airplanes as well. What's your point?

I say ask the question under the presumption that whomever is raised from the dead to make these observations and judgements is given a couple months of observation historical literature to acclimate themselves to the societal technological changes that have occurred since they were president so at least they can wrap their head around the concepts even if they don't agree with them from their nineteenth-century viewpoint. Then ask the relevant questions

That was totally pedantic on my part, but something that's always gnawed at me. Thank you for listening.