Opinion TR (1901-1909) vs. FDR (1933-1945)

[Gutter Chris]

He is. There is no country without Washington, and being the first POTUS was merely the third most important title he ever held. Similarly, there is no country at least as we know it without Lincoln. It's objectively just not possible to surpass either IMO, and the question posed for the thread isn't about GOAT but merely between the two Roosevelts themselves or more broadly the greatest of the 20th century (perhaps even of the last 160 years, post-Lincoln), and I'd say they are indeed 1/2 there.

I totally agree. Washington and Lincoln are kind of in a category of their own and no one else can ever really compete for 1 and 2 at the moment. The things those 2 had to do were on a completely different level. If Washington wasn't a man among men that would have been it for America meet the new boss same as the old boss. He could have made himself a king and I don't know many men myself included that could resist that temptation. That fact alone makes it almost impossible to take the top spot from him.

Then Abraham Lincoln had to hold the line no matter what and a big part of the thanks he gets is jerk offs calling him a tyrant on YouTube. No Lincoln and we are probably a totally different country for sure. John Wilkes booth is a cunt and I hope there's a special place in hell for the guy.


But I do think putting fdr in third place seems fair. Mount Rushmore really is the Mt Rushmore of presidents. Presidents should start trying to live up to their standards I'd love should we add so and so to be a sherdog argument worth having. I'm not sure men come in that caliber anymore.

 

[Natural Order]

 

[Deorum]

But I do think putting fdr in third place seems fair. Mount Rushmore really is the Mt Rushmore of presidents. Presidents should start trying to live up to their standards I'd love should we add so and so to be a sherdog argument worth having. I'm not sure men come in that caliber anymore.

The difference between Statesmen and Politicians.

Do you think I was fair to FDR in the layout of the OP? I respect the hell out of him, but (clearly) hold deep admiration and love for TR. I tried to put that bias aside in the cross comparison. I really do wish Teddy had run for a third term as the incumbent when he had all of the political momentum and party resources to easily pull it off. It's kind of ironic that people view him as the more authoritarian figure between the two when it was FDR who clung to power for third and fourth terms even in a state of severely diminished physical capacity, all the while invoking statutes like the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

The Pinchot–Ballinger Controversy was a dispute between high-level officials in the U.S. government regarding whether or not the federal government should allow private corporations to control water rights or instead cut them off so that the wilderness would be protected from capitalist greed. Between 1909 and 1910, the dispute escalated to a battle between President William Howard Taft (who supported Richard Ballinger) and ex-president Theodore Roosevelt (who supported Gifford Pinchot).

Pinchot, a close personal friend of Roosevelt, was Chief of the U.S. Forest Service. Ballinger was Secretary of the Interior. Roosevelt selected Taft in 1908 as his successor in the White House because he thought Taft fully agreed with his main policies. Roosevelt then left the country in early 1909, but friends soon flooded him with messages hostile towards Taft, and Roosevelt returned in 1910 convinced that his protege had betrayed him. The feud defined national political alignments between 1910 and 1914, as well as the conservation movement in the early 20th century.

Pinchot and his allies accused Ballinger of criminal behavior to help an old client of his and thus promote big business. Ballinger was eventually exonerated, but the highly publicized dispute escalated a growing split in the Republican Party. Taft took control of the Republican Party in 1912, but Roosevelt started the independent Progressive Bull Moose third party. Roosevelt successfully garnered more support than Taft, but it split the vote in the three-way 1912 presidential election, with Democrat Woodrow Wilson the winner.

CC: @Islam Imamate

 

[Gutter Chris]

The difference between Statesmen and Politicians.

Do you think I was fair to FDR in the layout of the OP? I respect the hell out of him, but (clearly) hold deep admiration and love for TR. I tried to put that bias aside in the cross comparison. I really do wish Teddy had run for a third term as the incumbent when he had all of the political momentum and party resources to easily pull it off. It's kind of ironic that people view him as the more authoritarian figure between the two when it was FDR who clung to power for third and fourth terms even in a state of severely diminished physical capacity, all the while invoking statutes like the Alien Enemies Act of 1798.

The Pinchot–Ballinger Controversy was a dispute between high-level officials in the U.S. government regarding whether or not the federal government should allow private corporations to control water rights or instead cut them off so that the wilderness would be protected from capitalist greed. Between 1909 and 1910, the dispute escalated to a battle between President William Howard Taft (who supported Richard Ballinger) and ex-president Theodore Roosevelt (who supported Gifford Pinchot).

Pinchot, a close personal friend of Roosevelt, was Chief of the U.S. Forest Service. Ballinger was Secretary of the Interior. Roosevelt selected Taft in 1908 as his successor in the White House because he thought Taft fully agreed with his main policies. Roosevelt then left the country in early 1909, but friends soon flooded him with messages hostile towards Taft, and Roosevelt returned in 1910 convinced that his protege had betrayed him. The feud defined national political alignments between 1910 and 1914, as well as the conservation movement in the early 20th century.

Pinchot and his allies accused Ballinger of criminal behavior to help an old client of his and thus promote big business. Ballinger was eventually exonerated, but the highly publicized dispute escalated a growing split in the Republican Party. Taft took control of the Republican Party in 1912, but Roosevelt started the independent Progressive Bull Moose third party. Roosevelt successfully garnered more support than Taft, but it split the vote in the three-way 1912 presidential election, with Democrat Woodrow Wilson the winner.

CC: @Islam Imamate

Yea you were fair even though i new you were totally a teddy guy. You guys are some cowboys....i hate sleeping in a tent so of course im going to go fdr.

Fdr does come with some controversy and is a complicated president to talk about. But you made a case for why he might be better just fine.

 

[Deorum]

Yea you were fair even though i new you were totally a teddy guy. You guys are some cowboys....i hate sleeping in a tent so of course im going to go fdr.

Fdr does come with some controversy and is a complicated president to talk about. But you made a case for why he might be better just fine.

Man's ran a cattle ranch in the Badlands of NoDak, proclaimed the country's first National Monument on outskirts of the Black Hills, and did more than anyone else to protect my favorite wilderness area on the planet (North Rim of the GC), declaring it the one great sight which every American should see. All of that shit resonates deeply with me, lol. He was a sickly child born into silver spooned privilege of east coast elites who turned himself into a self-sufficient western outdoorsman through force of will and a champion for public welfare through good conscience. He didn't deal with a Civil War or Great Depression -- his presidency was one that dealt in borderline euphoria and relentless win after win after win, setting the course for the 20th century.

"No man has had a happier life than I have led; a happier life in every way."

Believe That.

 

[BFoe]

Except in the ring.

TR under Unified Rules, FDR under PRIDE rules.

 

[Deorum]

I totally agree. Washington and Lincoln are kind of in a category of their own and no one else can ever really compete for 1 and 2 at the moment. The things those 2 had to do were on a completely different level. If Washington wasn't a man among men that would have been it for America meet the new boss same as the old boss. He could have made himself a king and I don't know many men myself included that could resist that temptation. That fact alone makes it almost impossible to take the top spot from him.

Then Abraham Lincoln had to hold the line no matter what and a big part of the thanks he gets is jerk offs calling him a tyrant on YouTube. No Lincoln and we are probably a totally different country for sure. John Wilkes booth is a cunt and I hope there's a special place in hell for the guy.

Maybe the South should've accepted the immense compromise that was the Corwin Amendment (would've been the 13th), which was passed by Congress and needed only ratification by the states. It was even supported by Lincoln himself at his inauguration and would've protected their precious institution. But no, they were hell bent on war and lost everything instead while turning Abe into a martyr and all-time national hero that many people now rank above George Washington. I just don't see it myself, but I do agree that he is a firm #2.

What could've been for the South in 1861:

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

What became reality for the South in 1865:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.



Everybody won with the 14th in 1868:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[Gutter Chris]

Maybe the South should've accepted the immense compromise that was the Corwin Amendment (would've been the 13th), which was passed by Congress and needed only ratification by the states. It was even supported by Lincoln himself at his inauguration and would've protected their precious institution. But no, they were hell bent on war and lost everything instead while turning Abe into a martyr and all-time national hero that many people now rank above George Washington. I just don't see it myself, but I do agree that he is a firm #2.

What could've been for the South in 1861:

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

What became reality for the South in 1865:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.



Everybody won with the 14th in 1868:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

It's better that they didn't. We needed to have that fight and put that shit to rest plus it had all kinds of unintended consequences like making America a true power and moving us closer to our promise of freedom .

I think it's better that it happened when it did too. Couple years later and weaponry would have made it so much worse. And any other president might not have been able to handle it and might have caved.

Sometimes when ya look back on history it seems certain men were made for the exact moment. Washington and Lincoln are truly remarkable people.

Maybe you should do those 2 head to head next and see what

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Presidents should start trying to live up to their standards I'd love should we add so and so to be a sherdog argument worth having. I'm not sure men come in that caliber anymore.

Historical conditions also play a big role. Washington, Lincoln, and FDR all came around at incredibly dramatic points in the nation's history.

They all rose up to the challenges, of course, but I'm sure they'd be remembered differently if they were president in, say, the 1820s, or the 1990s or some other period where the nation and the world weren't going through supremely important events.

 

[Deorum]

Before FDR, the ultra wealthy had a chokehold on nearly every aspect of working class life. There were no labor laws, no minimum wage, no safety nets. Children worked brutal shifts in dangerous conditions, and if you were injured on the job, you were discarded like scrap. Strikes were crushed by police or private thugs hired by the very people bleeding workers dry. The rich lived in unchecked luxury while the rest of the country scraped by, powerless and disposable. The government didn’t lift a finger, because it didn’t have to. It served the same class that owned the factories, the railroads, and the banks.

FDR, obviously. By far the GOATPOTUS. Even above Lincoln. Lincoln was a great wartime president, but we'll never know how good he would've been in peace. FDR had to deal with the greatest economic calamity the US has ever faced, and the biggest war in the history of the human race, and we came out of it as the world's #1 power. It's a shame that neoliberals in both parties have pissed all over his legacy since then and ruined everything that made this country great, but the "American century" wouldn't have happened without him.

They're both phenomenal Presidents, but I'll take FDR simply because his circumstances were so much worse. His massive political capital from helping get us out of the Great Depression and World War II was spent primarily on genuinely helping the American people; not just for his term, but for the future as well.

100%

FDR vs Lincoln for the #1 spot is a better matchup.

Successfully steering the country through the Great Depression and then World War II immediately after is massive and likely won't ever be replicated. New Deal policies and agencies set the course for what a modern, developed nation should provide its citizens.

FDR easily.

Y'all would've made for great supporters of Teddy's Bull Moose party. The only time there has ever been a legitimate third-party contender in the history of the country.

The Progressive Party, popularly nicknamed the Bull Moose Party, was a third party in the United States formed in 1912 by former president Theodore Roosevelt after he lost the presidential nomination of the Republican Party to his former protégé turned rival, incumbent president William Howard Taft. The new party was known for taking advanced positions on progressive reforms and attracting leading national reformers. The party was also ideologically deeply connected with America's radical-liberal tradition

The party's platform built on Roosevelt's Square Deal domestic program centered around corporate regulation, consumer protection, and the conservation of natural resources, calling for several progressive reforms. The platform asserted that "to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day". Proposals on the platform included restrictions on campaign finance contributions, a reduction of the tariff and the establishment of a social insurance system, an eight-hour workday and women's suffrage.

In the 1912 election, Roosevelt won 27.4% of the popular vote compared to Taft's 23.2%, making Roosevelt the only third-party presidential nominee in American history to finish with a higher share of the popular vote than a major party's presidential nominee. Both Taft and Roosevelt finished behind Democratic nominee Woodrow Wilson, who won 41.8% of the popular vote and the majority of the electoral vote.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Those sound pretty good, I guess.

But the big question is, what's their stance on how many genders there are?

 

[BFoe]

Y'all would've made for great supporters of Teddy's Bull Moose party. The only time there has ever been a legitimate third-party contender in the history of the country.

(I know TR outperformed Perot, and actually TR outperformed the Dem nominee in 1912, I’m just saying, Perot was a legitimate 3rd party candidate).

The Progressive Party, popularly nicknamed the Bull Moose Party, was a third party in the United States formed in 1912 by former president Theodore Roosevelt after he lost the presidential nomination of the Republican Party to his former protégé turned rival, incumbent president William Howard Taft. The new party was known for taking advanced positions on progressive reforms and attracting leading national reformers. The party was also ideologically deeply connected with America's radical-liberal tradition

The party's platform built on Roosevelt's Square Deal domestic program centered around corporate regulation, consumer protection, and the conservation of natural resources, calling for several progressive reforms. The platform asserted that "to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day". Proposals on the platform included restrictions on campaign finance contributions, a reduction of the tariff and the establishment of a social insurance system, an eight-hour workday and women's suffrage.

In the 1912 election, Roosevelt won 27.4% of the popular vote compared to Taft's 23.2%, making Roosevelt the only third-party presidential nominee in American history to finish with a higher share of the popular vote than a major party's presidential nominee. Both Taft and Roosevelt finished behind Democratic nominee Woodrow Wilson, who won 41.8% of the popular vote and the majority of the electoral vote.

I’m not anti-TR by any means, I just think FDR was the greater POTUS. In fairness, he did have 3 full terms plus some of a 4th, but he also had 2 of the biggest crises in national history during those terms.

 

[LMP]

Y'all would've made for great supporters of Teddy's Bull Moose party. The only time there has ever been a legitimate third-party contender in the history of the country.

The Progressive Party, popularly nicknamed the Bull Moose Party, was a third party in the United States formed in 1912 by former president Theodore Roosevelt after he lost the presidential nomination of the Republican Party to his former protégé turned rival, incumbent president William Howard Taft. The new party was known for taking advanced positions on progressive reforms and attracting leading national reformers. The party was also ideologically deeply connected with America's radical-liberal tradition

The party's platform built on Roosevelt's Square Deal domestic program centered around corporate regulation, consumer protection, and the conservation of natural resources, calling for several progressive reforms. The platform asserted that "to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day". Proposals on the platform included restrictions on campaign finance contributions, a reduction of the tariff and the establishment of a social insurance system, an eight-hour workday and women's suffrage.

In the 1912 election, Roosevelt won 27.4% of the popular vote compared to Taft's 23.2%, making Roosevelt the only third-party presidential nominee in American history to finish with a higher share of the popular vote than a major party's presidential nominee. Both Taft and Roosevelt finished behind Democratic nominee Woodrow Wilson, who won 41.8% of the popular vote and the majority of the electoral vote.

I like Teddy, I've written post about him in the past. FDR was more influential long term though. Both great, Teddy is in the top tier on my list with FDR.

 

[Deorum]

I’m not anti-TR by any means, I just think FDR was the greater POTUS. In fairness, he did have 3 full terms plus some of a 4th, but he also had 2 of the biggest crises in national history during those terms.

I like Teddy, I've written post about him in the past. FDR was more influential long term though. Both great, Teddy is in the top tier on my list with FDR.

Yeah, no doubt. Epic Americans.

The number of parallels was actually pretty wild.

The Roosevelt Bond: How War and Politics Brought FDR and TR Closer

www.neh.gov

Only Teddy had an active crazy gene, though.

On May 26, 1914, Teddy Roosevelt ventured to Washington, D.C., to deliver a lecture at the National Geographic Society.

Only a week before, Roosevelt had appeared in New York a jaundiced, frail version of his legendary robust self, after a seven-month trip deep into the Amazon jungle. While trying to save a canoe from being swept away by the River of Doubt, he had injured his calf. The wound became infected, and tropical fever engulfed his body. A bullet still lodged in his chest from an unsuccessful assassination attempt in 1912 further compromised his health.

Roosevelt made it out of the Amazon, though thirty-five pounds lighter and leaning on a cane. New lines etched his face and the familiar boom was gone from his voice. The changes to the former president’s appearance were so stark that the New York Times ran before and after pictures. But Roosevelt had not lost his flip humor. When a reporter asked about his health, he replied, “I am worth more than several dead men yet.”

 

[Deorum]

Don't act like you care about national parks when you support Republicans. That's just stomping on TR legacy.

Republicans have been a different animal since the Reagan Revolution. For all that has changed and been dumped along the way up to present-day MAGA, one notable consistency is the outright hostility not just to nature conservation but the very idea of public lands. It makes them utterly unelectable to me on that issue alone. They are absolute, 100% fucktards and a threat to TR's legacy. It's also a position that isn't supported by their own constituents in western red states that have a lot of it. They just won't fuck off either, forever plotting and scheming to rob Americans of our birthright. And these places are really protected and preserved for the world at large.

 

[Deorum]

FDR lead us through the greatest crises of the century but also oversaw what might be the single most egregious infringement of civil liberties by the federal government in that same time frame in the form of Japanese internment as well as breaking the two term limit norm. So a great visionary leader but also tyrannical by presidential standards. Higher highs and lower lows than Teddy

And he was never seriously challenged, even four presidential cycles deep. He put on absolute electoral beatdown clinics in 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944. I believe @essie would acknowledge these as mandate landslides.

 

[Beechwood]

I'll have to go with Teddy!

I'm currently reading a book that takes a dim view of FDR and his policies. It is certainly an eye opening read comparing the myth of FDR compared to the reality of his policies.

FDR's Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression​

Amazon.com

The Great Depression and the New Deal. For generations, the collective American consciousness has believed that the former ruined the country and the latter saved it. Endless praise has been heaped upon President Franklin Delano Roosevelt for masterfully reining in the Depression’s destructive effects and propping up the
country on his New Deal platform. In fact, FDR has achieved mythical status in American history and is considered to be, along with Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln, one of the greatest presidents of all time. But would the Great Depression have been so catastrophic had the New Deal never been implemented?

In FDR’s Folly, historian Jim Powell argues that it was in fact the New Deal itself, with its shortsighted programs, that deepened the Great Depression, swelled the federal government, and prevented the country from turning around quickly. You’ll discover in alarming detail how FDR’s federal programs hurt America more than helped it, with effects we still feel today, including:

• How Social Security actually increased unemployment
• How higher taxes undermined good businesses
• How new labor laws threw people out of work
• And much more

This groundbreaking book pulls back the shroud of awe and the cloak of time enveloping FDR to prove convincingly how flawed his economic policies actually were, despite his good intentions and the astounding intellect of his circle of advisers. In today’s turbulent domestic and global environment, eerily similar to that of the 1930s, it’s more important than ever before to uncover and understand the truth of our history, lest we be doomed to repeat it.
Read less

 

[Stump]

FDR lead us through the greatest crises of the century but also oversaw what might be the single most egregious infringement of civil liberties by the federal government in that same time frame in the form of Japanese internment as well as breaking the two term limit norm. So a great visionary leader but also tyrannical by presidential standards. Higher highs and lower lows than Teddy

I think teddy's behavior towards peurto ricans, Filipinos, native Americans - all of whom were citizens or at least subjects of America at the time, was FAR worse than the Japanese internment.

He was also in power when outright racism was broadly accepted, so that has yo be taken into account, but even with a morality informed by historical subjectivity, im not sure I'd agree that Frankie's lows were lower than teddy's, who said

"I don’t go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of every ten are."

Sure, the disposession, forced relocation and farm labor system set up for Japanese Americans was pretty awful, but compared to what teddy did to and said about native Americans, it's not nearly as low

 

[Deorum]

I think teddy's behavior towards peurto ricans, Filipinos, native Americans - all of whom were citizens or at least subjects of America at the time, was FAR worse than the Japanese internment.

He was also in power when outright racism was broadly accepted, so that has yo be taken into account, but even with a morality informed by historical subjectivity, im not sure I'd agree that Frankie's lows were lower than teddy's, who said

"I don’t go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of every ten are."

Sure, the disposession, forced relocation and farm labor system set up for Japanese Americans was pretty awful, but compared to what teddy did to and said about native Americans, it's not nearly as low

Teddy managed to be darkly humorous even when he was horrible. His lows are his lows, and I've never felt any need to try and apologize for him. Not because there isn't historical context to temper them, I just find it ultimately irrelevant and superceded by the fact that he was the tip of the spear for ending the egregious abuses of the Gilded Age, with the three c's of his Square Deal platform taking on several very directly.

He's got a reputation for gung-ho jingoism and a love for war, yet foreign policy during his presidency was defined by the expansion of global commerce with a direct hand in organizing peace deals that either ended wars or prevented them. He was a damn near flawless POTUS and the greatest conservationist in human history to boot -- not necessarily because he cared more than several citizen heroes, but because he had the power to do more.

He is one of one.

“Here is your country. Cherish these natural wonders, cherish the natural resources, cherish the history and romance as a sacred heritage for your children and your children’s children. Do not let selfish men or greedy interests skin your country of its beauty, its riches, or its romance.”