Social War Room Lounge v259 *InsertTitleHere*

Is it whisky or whiskey?

  • Total voters
    36
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sara said:
I bet if people just didn’t post in threads that shouldn’t exist in the first place they’d fall away into obscurity......where they belong
Click to expand...

Or you know, if a mod is actively moderating my posts in a thread that doesn't need to exist they can help it not exist instead of actively moderating my posting in it, lol.
 
Jack V Savage said:
When I saw your comment, I thought I'd agree, as there's a lot of revisionism about Nixon, especially among True Progressives (the last leftist president or some shit). But 29 isn't too bad. Not sure that there's anyone below him that he should definitely be lower than. Lots of others I have bigger disagreements about (JFK at No. 10 was the most WTF ranking, though Obama at 17 was pretty bad, too).
Click to expand...
Reagan ahead of LBJ is truly baffling as I think the latter is easily top 10 if not top 5.
 
essie said:
Reagan ahead of LBJ is truly baffling as I think the latter is easily top 10 if not top 5.
Click to expand...

Big positives for LBJ but also big negatives. But the comparison kind of illustrates one of the problems with the whole exercise. I'd guess that the historians are trying to be ideologically neutral, which really isn't possible or a desirable goal (plus, a serious analysis would try to isolate the particular contributions of the individual outside of context, but that's just not possible with presidents). I'm always torn between wanting to chime in on this kind of thing and knowing that no one really knows how to get a good answer, including me. Imagine Buchanan and Clinton switching eras. First, it's kind of impossible because our personalities are developed in the context of society. But second, wouldn't be surprising if Buchanan was not a disaster if he became president when Clinton did, and while Clinton wouldn't fuck up as badly as Buchanan did, very possible that he would have made some mistake that led to him being considered a disaster.
 
Jack V Savage said:
Big positives for LBJ but also big negatives. But the comparison kind of illustrates one of the problems with the whole exercise. I'd guess that the historians are trying to be ideologically neutral, which really isn't possible or a desirable goal (plus, a serious analysis would try to isolate the particular contributions of the individual outside of context, but that's just not possible with presidents). I'm always torn between wanting to chime in on this kind of thing and knowing that no one really knows how to get a good answer, including me. Imagine Buchanan and Clinton switching eras. First, it's kind of impossible because our personalities are developed in the context of society. But second, wouldn't be surprising if Buchanan was not a disaster if he became president when Clinton did, and while Clinton wouldn't fuck up as badly as Buchanan did, very possible that he would have made some mistake that led to him being considered a disaster.
Click to expand...
It's a silly exercise but I still get excited by those lists, being a political nerd. I think the better way to do it is really tiers. Like you said it's hard to move anyone that is ranked behind Nixon ahead of him but he is equally as awful as them too.
 
Sara said:
I bet if people just didn’t post in threads that shouldn’t exist in the first place they’d fall away into obscurity......where they belong
Click to expand...

What's funny is he's too stupid to realize that he contradicted himself (I knew that he would). He complained that all Whippy's threads are "troll" threads but then countered my Queen B point by saying he doesn't fall for "troll bait ". He's got the intelligence of a fire hydrant (no offense to fire hydrants)
 
Nixon might be the worst president in recent times.

Corrupt - Watergate

Opens up trade to China - West loses their manufacturing edge to slave labour and now evil the Chinese regime is going to overshadow the west.

Middle East deals - petrodollars with the Saudis and Israel deal with the crook Kissinger means their constant meddling in internal affairs and to destabilize the world with perpetual wars. Petrodollars also led to too much power for the federal government and inflation.

War on drugs - big disaster.

There’s some good he’s done though,

Like ending the Vietnam war and passing environmental laws way ahead of his time.
 
hH9Sj95.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,797
Messages
58,318,432
Members
175,998
Latest member
Rosabelot

Share this page

Back
Top