Majority of Democrats think Obama was a better President than Washington

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/473894-poll-majority-of-democrats-think-obama-was-better-president


How did this country get so historically ignorant

[Storr]

I guess one could chalk this up to recency bias. Democrats living today lived through Obama's Presidency, but not Washington's. Now way I feel Obama was a better President than Washington though. Washington established the precedent of a President not being a king, while Obama massively expanded Presidential power (drone warfare including extrajudicial killing of American citizens, DACA w/o Congressional approval, among others).

[Orser67]

I don't agree that Obama was better than Washington. But this part of the article is also worth noting:

Forty-four percent of Republican voters polled said Washington was a better president than Trump, while 37 percent said Trump is better than Washington.

...The question was “inspired” by a recent Economist/YouGov Poll that asked voters whether Trump or Abraham Lincoln was a better “Republican president,” according to the poll. That poll found that 53 percent of Republicans said Trump was a better president than Lincoln, while 47 percent chose the Civil War-era leader.

[lfromnj]

The Democrat party is the cult of Obama.

#bothsides

[Pheurton Skeurto]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that most Americans were not alive for the Washington presidency, so they can't exactly recall his significant accomplishments *when he was President*. Obama, on the other hand...

[OSR stands with Israel]

I don't agree that Obama was better than Washington. But this part of the article is also worth noting:

Forty-four percent of Republican voters polled said Washington was a better president than Trump, while 37 percent said Trump is better than Washington.

...The question was “inspired” by a recent Economist/YouGov Poll that asked voters whether Trump or Abraham Lincoln was a better “Republican president,” according to the poll. That poll found that 53 percent of Republicans said Trump was a better president than Lincoln, while 47 percent chose the Civil War-era leader.

Which is why I asked how has this country gotten so historically ignorant

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that most Americans were not alive for the Washington presidency, so they can't exactly recall his significant accomplishments *when he was President*. Obama, on the other hand...

Badgers old. Maybe he can tell us what the Washington presidency was like?

[Xing]

Yes, there is ignorance in the Democratic Party as well (historical revisionism as well.) Doesn't make the ignorance on the right excusable, especially since Obama is an infinitely better person than Trump.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that most Americans were not alive for the Washington presidency, so they can't exactly recall his significant accomplishments *when he was President*. Obama, on the other hand...

Which is exactly why I used the term historically ignorant.  I mean you learn about Washington's and Lincoln's accomplishments when you are in Elementry School yet we get polls like this.

[7,052,770]

Well, what, 30% of Democrats have a pretty obvious reason to dislike George Washington, no?

[RINO Tom]

Well, what, 30% of Democrats have a pretty obvious reason to dislike George Washington, no?

I mean, arguably no.  I'd be skeptical that your average Black Democrat has any special animosity toward George Washington, assuming you were talking about that.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Well, what, 30% of Democrats have a pretty obvious reason to dislike George Washington, no?

It wasnt 30% it was 63%. The excuses made by red avatars in this thread lol mirror the excuses made by many blue avatars in the Lincoln thread.


The fact is all these polls show is how historically ignorant our country has become

[President Johnson]

Clearly it should be differentiated between two questions: "Which president was better?" and "which president do you like more?". I think a lot of people who get asked the first question give the answer to the second question. For example, my favorite president (or the "best in my opinion") is Lyndon Johnson. However, it's obviously difficult to argue how he was a better president than FDR or Lincoln. The same when you are a traditional Republican, your favorite might be Ronald Reagan, but it's hard to insist he was better than Lincoln or Washington.

[Kingpoleon]

It's worse than that, I've brought this up before but my 86 year old grandma considers Trump to be the greatest President of her lifetime. Not FDR, not Eisenhower, not JFK, not LBJ, not even Reagan (though she was a hardcore Democrat during his presidency). I figured that even if you liked Trump, there was no way that he could be considered the greatest President to a rational, sane person, but clearly I was giving Republicans and their brainwashed minds too much credit.
 
Studies like this beg the question as to how this country is going to survive when Trump is out of office, and these people still persist. This fanatical devotion is completely unlike anything that a stable republic can handle.

Hmmm...? Why aren’t Republicans saying nonsense like this about Democrats?

[Badger]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that most Americans were not alive for the Washington presidency, so they can't exactly recall his significant accomplishments *when he was President*. Obama, on the other hand...

Badgers old. Maybe he can tell us what the Washington presidency was like?

" get off my lawn you little punk!" ( shakes cane)

[DrScholl]

Washington was a slave owner so in comparison to Obama of course Obama is going to come out on top. Plus from a personal perspective people are going to pick a President that they have lived under.

With that said you could apply the same sort of logic to the Lincoln vs. Trump poll among Republicans, but Republicans have called themselves the party of Lincoln and Trump is hardly a paragon of being presidential.

[Hindsight was 2020]

If the point is to whataboutism the Trump/Lincoln poll that got a big reaction then I’d like to point out the massive key difference that Obama isn’t a massive asshole

[Mr. Reactionary]

If the point is to whataboutism the Trump/Lincoln poll that got a big reaction then I’d like to point out the massive key difference that Obama isn’t a massive asshole

Debatable.

[RINO Tom]

If the point is to whataboutism the Trump/Lincoln poll that got a big reaction then I’d like to point out the massive key difference that Obama isn’t a massive asshole

If the point here is that it's a good thing no Democrat - whether by dumb luck or the party's voters being morally superior - is put in the position of having to either abandon their preferred party or defend a "massive asshole," then I think many Republicans would agree with you and "trade" eagerly.

[Grassroots]

See when polls are released showing Trump more popular among republicans than Lincoln, it's because republicans are stupid and racist and etc. But when polls show Obama more popular than Washington they rush to defend the party, saying sh*t like "they don't remember him". Shut up, get a grip.

[7,052,770]

See when polls are released showing Trump more popular among republicans than Lincoln, it's because republicans are stupid and racist and etc. But when polls show Obama more popular than Washington they rush to defend the party, saying sh*t like "they don't remember him". Shut up, get a grip.

Lincoln ended the brutal, dehumanizing American system of legalized slavery. Washington condoned and personally participated in it. It's baffling why this is so hard for you.

I would still rank Washington high in spite of that because of the precedents he set, but it's ok for people to disagree about the rankings of the presidents.

On top of that, it's fairly likely that Obama will be widely considered a top 10 president in the future, certainly top 20, while Trump is a lock to be bottom 5 or worse, so the Trump-Obama comparisons probably don't work to begin with.

[Grassroots]

See when polls are released showing Trump more popular among republicans than Lincoln, it's because republicans are stupid and racist and etc. But when polls show Obama more popular than Washington they rush to defend the party, saying sh*t like "they don't remember him". Shut up, get a grip.

Lincoln ended the brutal, dehumanizing American system of legalized slavery. Washington condoned and personally participated in it. It's baffling why this is so hard for you.

I would still rank Washington high in spite of that because of the precedents he set, but it's ok for people to disagree about the rankings of the presidents.

On top of that, it's fairly likely that Obama will be widely considered a top 10 president in the future, certainly top 20, while Trump is a lock to be bottom 5 or worse, so the Trump-Obama comparisons probably don't work to begin with.

These two statements alone show you are horribly out of touch.

[OSR stands with Israel]

See when polls are released showing Trump more popular among republicans than Lincoln, it's because republicans are stupid and racist and etc. But when polls show Obama more popular than Washington they rush to defend the party, saying sh*t like "they don't remember him". Shut up, get a grip.

Lincoln ended the brutal, dehumanizing American system of legalized slavery. Washington condoned and personally participated in it. It's baffling why this is so hard for you.

I would still rank Washington high in spite of that because of the precedents he set, but it's ok for people to disagree about the rankings of the presidents.

On top of that, it's fairly likely that Obama will be widely considered a top 10 president in the future, certainly top 20, while Trump is a lock to be bottom 5 or worse, so the Trump-Obama comparisons probably don't work to begin with.

Reagan is also considered a top 10 President by historians so if Republicans consider him the greatest would you defend them . The fact is Reagan is still nowhere near as great as Washington and Lincoln and anyone who believes that is historically ignorant .


Without Washington, this country would not exist in the first place, and the bill of rights passed under his administration so yes to say Obama>Washington is historically ignorant and should not be defended. 

[Progressive Pessimist]

It's worse than that, I've brought this up before but my 86 year old grandma considers Trump to be the greatest President of her lifetime. Not FDR, not Eisenhower, not JFK, not LBJ, not even Reagan (though she was a hardcore Democrat during his presidency). I figured that even if you liked Trump, there was no way that he could be considered the greatest President to a rational, sane person, but clearly I was giving Republicans and their brainwashed minds too much credit.
 
Studies like this beg the question as to how this country is going to survive when Trump is out of office, and these people still persist. This fanatical devotion is completely unlike anything that a stable republic can handle.

Hmmm...? Why aren’t Republicans saying nonsense like this about Democrats?

How is that nonsense? It may be anecdotal, but it's the truth about my grandma and how she, a very informed person, mind you, who isn't "historically ignorant;" let her cognitive dissonance take precedent over obvious, more logical, and rational perspective. What has Trump done that is objectively beneficial or important to the nation in any way? His legacy is going to be based entirely out of his toxicity.

You can make an equivalency between this and Trump supporting Republicans all you want, but I believe Xingkerui said it best here:

Yes, there is ignorance in the Democratic Party as well (historical revisionism as well.) Doesn't make the ignorance on the right excusable, especially since Obama is an infinitely better person than Trump.

I would add though that I can understand what may be some reasons why Democrats may hold Obama in higher esteem than Washington, whether I agree with them or not.

For one thing, Obama being the first black President is undeniably important to a significant portion of the party and may be as important to them as founding the country itself.

Furthermore, some Democrats may be growing cynical about the role the Founders played in our country. In seeing how our country's institutions are handling an executive like Trump, I can't blame any Democrats for thinking that the Founders' lack of foresight about the Constitution and how it would translate into the future would end up being a net negative for their legacies. Anyway, I've come to believe that idolizing historical figures is a mistake, but it's an aspect of our country that is so ingrained in our culture, that it leads to people like Trump wanting to pursue the Presidency, in part for the glory that tends to come from it. The Founders were people too, and all people are flawed. It's not wrong to acknowledge that and keep it in mind when forming an opinion on them, no matter how important they were to the country...which is presently in free-fall anyway.

Can I also just point out that when even someone as anti-Trump as Old School Republican finds himself insisting on defending even the most ignorant Republican voters, that it doesn't instill much confidence in myself that history won't repeat itself and put us right back in this same situation after another Republican President gets elected after eight years of a Democratic President. The same impulse to checkmate "libs" is unfortunately endemic to most Republicans it seems, no matter how much they may pride themselves on being above the worst facets of Trumpism. The false equivalencies can't help but be drawn. That does not bode well for a sustainable, less polarized future in our country. The pre-2016 divisions are going to come back as the Old School Republicans of the country renew their kinship with the reactionary Trump fanatic and share an interest in opposing the next Democratic President to an extent that ignores Trump and the incontestable negativity that he fostered. The next Democratic President, no matter how flawed, or potentially justifiably deserving of it, is going to get the Obama treatment also, but even worse and without any regard for how there is no way that they can be anywhere near as bad as Trump. Mark my words! Our country's political culture is doomed to be in a constant vicious cycle.

[7,052,770]

These two statements alone show you are horribly out of touch.

TIL I learned that recognizing slavery for the atrocity it was makes me "horribly out of touch"

Reagan is also considered a top 10 President by historians so if Republicans consider him the greatest would you defend them .

While I don't think your first statement is universal, but sure, I would expect most Republicans to rank Reagan ahead of Lincoln for sure and potentially Washington.

The fact is Reagan is still nowhere near as great as Washington and Lincoln and anyone who believes that is historically ignorant .

I mean, that's just your (and my) opinion. It's not right to just declare that people who have different opinions than us are "historically ignorant." People have different priorities when they rate these things.

Without Washington, this country would not exist in the first place, and the bill of rights passed under his administration so yes to say Obama>Washington is historically ignorant and should not be defended. 

Yes, there's a lot good going for Washington, but there's also a lot good going for Obama. The ACA has saved (and will save) countless lives, and I think Obama probably ends up getting credit for getting the ball rolling on whatever the end stage of health care is over the next decade or 2. Really I think it's too early to really evaluate Obama like this, but I think it's at least possible he'll end up in the tier with Washington, but I won't declare that people who rank Obama higher or lower than I do are ignorant of history automatically.

Notice how neither you nor Grassroots disagreed with my point that Trump is a bottom 5 president for sure, and potentially will go down as the #1 worst. That's the key difference in the 2 different comparisons. You have 4 presidents:

• A - someone usually ranked in the top 5 who has a lot of great qualities, but one really, really awful black mark that stands out and tarnishes his reputation
• B - an obvious all-time great, probably #1 or at least top 3, who literally saved the country from being torn apart
• C - too early to tell, but probably going to go down as a good one, potentially a great one
• D - too early to tell if he's a clear #1 worst or just one of the bottom 5

"Republicans think D is actually better than A!" is not equivalent to "Democrats think C is better than B" because at least C could possibly be put in that tier by future historians, while it's A is a probably the all-time best and D is probably the all-time worst. You're drawing a false #bothsides equivalency that just isn't valid.