Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 05, 2015, 07:32:50 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  Most overrated president
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Print
Author Topic: Most overrated president  (Read 16536 times)
PBrunsel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9604


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: August 19, 2004, 09:21:12 am »
Ignore

We tend to forget Ander Jackson saved the Union from an early Civil War. He stared down Vice President Calhoun, the "nulification" man, and told him, "Our Union, it must be preserved."  He threatened hangings to any Congressman who preached sessesion on the floors of Congress.

Jackson saved the Union.
Postponed it till the South had no chance of winning it, is more like. Smiley

The South had more chance of winning it in the 1860's due to them having more industry than in the 1830's.
Logged


"I know that the Lord is always on the side of the right. But it is my constant anxiety and prayer that I and this nation should be on the Lord's side."
-President Abraham Lincoln, December 1862
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58767
India


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: August 19, 2004, 09:28:50 am »
Ignore

We tend to forget Ander Jackson saved the Union from an early Civil War. He stared down Vice President Calhoun, the "nulification" man, and told him, "Our Union, it must be preserved."  He threatened hangings to any Congressman who preached sessesion on the floors of Congress.

Jackson saved the Union.
Postponed it till the South had no chance of winning it, is more like. Smiley

The South had more chance of winning it in the 1860's due to them having more industry than in the 1830's.
Yes, but the gap also got bigger.
More to the point, the North's big advantage in population developed after that time, and o/c, there were no railroads in 1830, which means it would have been far more difficult to move men to the battlefields. There were also improvements in weapon technology, though these were dwarved by those in the war itself.
A civil war in 1830 would have been more like 1812 than 1865.
Of course there wasn't as much support for secession in 1830 as there was in 1860 - simply because the "Domestic Institutions" were not under threat from Democracy. Yet. Otherwise, Jackson wouldn't have dared use the language he did. In fact, otherwise he'd more likely than not have supported secession. He was a large slaveholder from a state that did secede, after all.

Logged

If I'm shown as having been active here recently it's either because I've been using the gallery, because I've been using the search engine looking up something from way back, or because I've been reading the most excellent UK by-elections thread again.
PBrunsel
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9604


View Profile WWW
« Reply #27 on: August 19, 2004, 09:42:04 am »
Ignore

Durring the Taylor Administration sesession began to be really thought of as an alternative for the South.
Logged


"I know that the Lord is always on the side of the right. But it is my constant anxiety and prayer that I and this nation should be on the Lord's side."
-President Abraham Lincoln, December 1862
Dr. Cynic
Lawrence Watson
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12556
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.11, S: -6.09

View Profile
« Reply #28 on: August 19, 2004, 01:29:07 pm »
Ignore

One thing I will say for Jackson is he wanted to preserve the union.
Logged

The Duke
JohnD.Ford
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9394


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: August 20, 2004, 03:54:02 am »
Ignore

john ford you know that is just as incorrect as the 'missle gap' was.
In 500 years, I'll be dead. I guess it really wouldn't matter. I just find Reagan's ignorance about things like that overwhelming. The same as I found Jimmy Carter to be utterly unfit to be President. I think though, by the time Reagn was President, the people were kidding themselves if they thought the Soviets wouldn't collapse soon.

On January 20th, 1981, the USSR was more powerful than the US.

Hah!

john ford you know that is just as incorrect as the 'missle gap' was.

Actually, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a serious military analysis that shows that had the US and USSR come to blows in W. Europe that we'd have won.  The Soviets had vastly superior armor and in far greater numbers to their NATO counterparts.  The Soviets were closer to the field of battle that their US counterparts.  NATO did not have nearly as compatible of weapon systems as the USSR.

I also think you'd be hard pressed to demonstrate that the US had superior nuclear capabilities in 1981.  The Soviets had more warheads and, unlike the US, their missiles were usually mobile negating any possible counterforce capability the US might have otherwise had.

America had an advantage in the air, but wars aren't won by airpower.  There is an old joke that one Soviet general met another Soviet general in Paris and asked him, "By the way, who won the air war?"  Ultimately, US air superiority against Soviet fighters would not have been sufficient to stem the superior Soviet armored and artillery forces, and since stealth technology was not in service yet, US aircraft would have their operations hindered by Soviet SAMs and AAA even if they did achieve victory against the Soviet air force.

At sea, we'd have a draw.  Soviet aircraft and tactics for attacking American carriers were sufficiently advanced that the US would not have been able to effectively deploy or re-supply forces.  Soviet submarines would not make this effort any easier.

The Soviet military was already proving its superiority in subduing Afghan militias.  This contrasted greatly with America's disaster in Vietnam.  It was not until later when the USSR was strained by the US arms buildup and CIA activity that they faltered in central Asia.

Economically, the USSR was behind the US, but there is no doubt that our lead wasn't growing, but was staying constant.  During the decade of the 1970s, the USSR managed to keep pace with the USA.
Logged

Shut you hole... Conservatism is dead. I hope I get to see your head paraded on a pike with it.
Bugs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 577


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 02, 2004, 05:28:28 pm »
Ignore

Jackson is my choice.
Logged

"Truth is generally the best vindication against slander."---Abraham Lincoln
Sarnstrom
sarnstrom54014
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 682


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: September 02, 2004, 05:52:09 pm »
Ignore

My Picks:

1. Dwight Eisenhower
2. Ronald Reagan
3. Calvin Coolidge
Logged



Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.44

My Congressman: Ron Kind (D)
My State Senator: Sheila Harsdorf (R)
My State Represenative: Kitty Rhoades (R)
Jim Valvano
Liberty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1317
United States


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2004, 07:18:31 pm »
Ignore

In my mind it's FDR because he put drove America in the wrong direction when he tried to solve the depression with his new deal.

From Reassessing the Presidency "It is remarkable to note that. . . to this day Franklin Roosevelt is still appropriating one dollar of every ten. . . to be used by the federal government establishment. In a sense, all of us tithe to the memory of this man."
Logged

I will thank God for the day and the moment I have.
??????????
StatesRights
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31255
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: September 02, 2004, 08:42:37 pm »
Ignore

Lincoln.
Logged
Dabeav
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 312
United States


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: September 02, 2004, 10:16:58 pm »
Ignore

I agree with StatesRights.  Lincoln is by far the most overrated, with Reagan in second because of his recent death.  

Lincoln instituted the first not value-based currency in the US, Greenbacks and instituted the first graduated tax on the American people.  So, from his actions can be built the Federal Reserve and the IRS.  Maybe a indirect connection, but it is still there.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2004, 10:18:03 pm by Dabeav »Logged

"The sad thing is, our foreign policy WILL change eventually, as Rome's did, when all budgetary and monetary tricks to fund it are exhausted." - Ron Paul
swarch
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 77


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: September 03, 2004, 12:47:39 pm »
Ignore

1. FDR
2. Lincoln
3. Wilson
4. Reagan
5. JFK
Logged

pol-i-tics n [Gk poly- many + ticks little bloodsucking insects]

Economic Left/Right: +8.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.13
Rothbard
Newbie
*
Posts: 5


View Profile WWW
« Reply #36 on: September 09, 2004, 07:01:10 pm »
Ignore

Lincoln, for all the reasons stated, and so many, many more.
Logged

thou shall not steal, even by majority vote
Defarge
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2615


Political Matrix
E: -3.13, S: -0.72

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: September 11, 2004, 01:05:57 pm »
Ignore

Reagan and JFK are tied in my book
Logged
frenger
Bono
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11694
Portugal


Political Matrix
E: 8.65, S: -4.17

View Profile
« Reply #38 on: September 13, 2004, 08:17:18 am »
Ignore

In alphabetical order
Clinton
Eisenhower
FDR
JFK
Lincoln
« Last Edit: September 13, 2004, 08:18:16 am by Bono »Logged

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed and hence clamorous to be led to safety by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." H.L. Mencken



NO, I don't want to go back to Fantasy Elections.
JohnFKennedy
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7509


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: September 13, 2004, 11:41:23 am »
Ignore

1. FDR
2. Lincoln
3. Wilson
4. Reagan
5. JFK

In alphabetical order
Clinton
Eisenhower
FDR
JFK
Lincoln


BOO!
Logged
True Democrat
true democrat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7398
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

View Profile
« Reply #40 on: September 17, 2004, 08:01:45 pm »
Ignore

reagan by a long shot, he did nothing, he didnt even end the soviet union, it collapsed on its own
« Last Edit: September 17, 2004, 08:02:14 pm by true democrat »Logged

Michael Bloomberg for President.



Lol Winfield.  This quote is from a thread entitled "what do the following proceed to do if they are not nominated?"
Romney - President of Harvard
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13813
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #41 on: September 18, 2004, 06:09:33 am »
Ignore

In 500 years, I'll be dead. I guess it really wouldn't matter. I just find Reagan's ignorance about things like that overwhelming. The same as I found Jimmy Carter to be utterly unfit to be President. I think though, by the time Reagn was President, the people were kidding themselves if they thought the Soviets wouldn't collapse soon.

That's only clear in retrospect.  The Soviets had serious problems, but they also had the ability to force their citizens to endure hardship in order to continue their relentless military buildup and foreign aggression.  The democratic nations of the west lacked this ability.

When Reagan took office, Soviet power was at its peak in the world.  The Soviets were arguably ahead of the US militarily, all things considered.  They were certainly ahead in conventional arms in Europe, forcing NATO to rely on the first use of nuclear weapons as a deterrent to Soviet aggression.  They had recently invaded Afghanistan and were threatening Poland, on top of all the geopolitical gains they had made in the latter half of the 1970s using surrogates like the Cubans.

It was recognized that their economy was performing poorly, but this was mitigated at the time by the fact that they could force their people to endure hardship in order to devote a much higher percentage of their economic output toward the military than the US could ever get away with.

Reagan helped hasten their collapse by forcing them into an arms race that they couldn't afford.  From the mid-1960s, Soviet arms buildups had not been met by a western response, so there was little in the way of their strategic advances, but Reagan hit them where they were weakest by forcing them to strain their faltering economy further in order to keep up, rather than helping them in their weakest areas, as Nixon did under detente, and as the Democrats did and proposed to do.

It is facetious to then apply an inevitability to collapse of the Soviet Union in order to negate Reagan's contribution.  Reagan doesn't deserve the sole credit for their collapse, but he certainly helped.
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13813
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #42 on: September 18, 2004, 06:12:21 am »
Ignore

Correct answer: Andrew Jackson.  Our worst President is often regarded as top 10 because he hated the rich.  Never mind that his policies hurt the poor more than the rich, his hatred endears him to leftist historians.  JFK is second most overrated.  He is often rated too high by the public, but he actually was a decent PResident, as opposed to Jackson who was not.

Reagan was definately the most overrated. This is the same man who told schools to give kids ketchup, because he said it would provide the veggie part of the "Balanced" school lunch. That sounds really redundant.

In 500 years, what will matter more: Ketchup as a vegetable or the collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact?

It is almost always the case that those who make the strongest case of hating the rich, and advancing the poor, usually hurt the poor more than anybody.  Hurting the rich is not a good way to help the poor.  It sounds great but never works.
Logged
Kodratos
Ataturk
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 784


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: September 18, 2004, 08:37:19 pm »
Ignore

Definately JFK
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13813
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #44 on: September 18, 2004, 11:20:14 pm »
Ignore

Definately JFK

I agree that JFK has been seriously overrated.  I think he was a good president, but far from great.  If he hadn't been assassinated, he may have ended up like LBJ.

I love to see the liberals twist themselves into pretzels to explain away their hero's role in getting us into the war that they hated so much.  Some extreme liberals have even advanced the theory that he was assassinated strictly because he intended to withdraw from Vietnam.
Logged
Saratoga2DM
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 53


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: September 19, 2004, 06:45:56 pm »
Ignore

Ronald Reagan, despite the fact that he helped bankrupt the USSR he nearly bankrupted this country in the process.  He signed bills that gave tax cuts to the rich, while cutting social benefits and the increasing the tax burden on the middle and lower classes.  He presided over the Iran-Contra affair and denied any responsibility for it.  
Logged
Ronald Reagan
Spl2
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 292
United States


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: September 20, 2004, 05:05:56 pm »
Ignore

FDR!
Logged

In principio creavit Deus caelum et terram. (Genesis 1:1)
weallbleed
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 67


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: September 24, 2004, 10:18:27 pm »
Ignore

Reagan.

I like the guy and probably would've voted for him, but he didn't walk on water like most conservatives seem to believe.

After that, Kennedy, simply because he was in office for such a short term of time it would be impossible for him to be one of the best ever. He had potential, but we'll never know if he would've lived up to it.
Logged

I am voting for Badnarik in November, since I think Kerry and Bush are quite possibly the two worst people in the country to be president. I would very reluctantly chose Kerry if I had to, but the state I live in is not in play.


Economic Left/Right: 1.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.97
CARLHAYDEN
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10655


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -0.51

View Profile
« Reply #48 on: September 29, 2004, 11:42:42 pm »
Ignore

This has probably been up before... but anyway.

I say John F. Kennedy.

Agreed.

He did a few of thinks right.

NASA - he supported it while liberal Democrats today constantly try to cut its budget.

Special Forces - he forced the army to accept the Special Forces (aka Green Berets).  Please note the official name of the training facility.

Tax cuts - he was one of the few Democrats on a national level in the past fifty years to support tax cuts.

He appointed Whizzer White to the Supreme Court.

Logged

Registered in Arizona for Fantasy election purposes.
RomneyGekko Situation Hairgel
Flyers2004
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10509


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.87

View Profile
« Reply #49 on: September 30, 2004, 02:16:27 am »
Ignore

Ronald Reagan, despite the fact that he helped bankrupt the USSR he nearly bankrupted this country in the process.  He signed bills that gave tax cuts to the rich, while cutting social benefits and the increasing the tax burden on the middle and lower classes.  He presided over the Iran-Contra affair and denied any responsibility for it.  

I second that and I could add Dumbya to that as well.  All charisma, no substance!
Logged


DOUCHEBAGGERY AT ITS FINEST!
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines