• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Worst President Ever?

Worst Presidents or Worstest?

  • Millard Fillmore

    Votes: 2 4.9%

  • Franklin Pierce

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Benjamin Harrison

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Jimmy Carter

    Votes: 17 41.5%

  • James Buchanan

    Votes: 2 4.9%

  • Ronald Reagan

    Votes: 7 17.1%

  • Other (Describe in your post why)

    Votes: 13 31.7%
  • Total voters
    41
EpicDude86 said:
You make a good point, and, accounting for inflation on the value of looks, I'd say she's 20 times hotter than Susan B. Now, I would not have tapped it, but I would have at least stayed and listened to her speeches.
Click to expand...

Riiiiiight....Listening to a woman without wanting any poonany. :roll:
 
EpicDude86 said:
You make a good point, and, accounting for inflation on the value of looks, I'd say she's 20 times hotter than Susan B. Now, I would not have tapped it, but I would have at least stayed and listened to her speeches.
Click to expand...
Stone!
lucystone.jpg


Hey, I actually think Susan can look pretty good haha.

Side love:

susan-b-anthony.jpg
 
Lightdemon said:
What?? What's so bad about the 17th or 19th Amendments? Both of these were positive steps toward democracy.

I can see where you might disagree with the 16th, but the other two Amendments no American can deny that these were changes that were for the better.
Click to expand...

Oh, my bad. I meant the 18th, Prohibition, not the 19th.

The 17th Amendment terminated the Republic. The direction of US Senators by the people makes the Senate a second house of commons, not the representation of the aristocratic elements, which in the US means the "rich".

Everything started going downhill from there, and scumbuckets like Drunken Teddy, KKK Byrd, and others are spending entire lifetimes in the US Senate, a body that has less turnover than the Soviet Politiburo.
 
Crunch said:
Don't tell me you are a closet birther. :shock:
Click to expand...

No, I never said the Messiah was born in a closet.

I'm not even claiming the mud hut.

I want to know why the Messiah promoted a forgery on the Internet as his "proof" of citizenship.

That's not too much to ask.
 
Kandahar said:
Actually, pretty much every president between 1849 and 1881 (with the exception of Lincoln) was downright awful.
Click to expand...

Same with 1963-1981, a period of history I am much more familiar with....
 
Kandahar said:
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, do you?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do.

The Federal Reserve assumed the responsibility for maintaing the money supply.

When it was first created, it opened the spigots and the money flowed...ie, it kept interest rates low and was instrumental in preventing a post-war recession and creating the Roaring Twenties.

Then it got leery about the looming prospect of inflation and shut the money off...ie, jammed interest rates up, causing stock market crashes and runs on banks.

Why was the Fed created? To provide loans to regional banks to allow them to cover daily operations without cash shortages.

What did the Fed do when runs on the banks began creating cash shortages? It refused to lend the money....proving to the panicked people that their banks were running out of money and they'd better get their money out immediately.

The Fed caused the Depression. There's really no debate about this.

The president has pull. That's his power to affect the Constitutional Amendments. Also, you people blame Bush for the economic failures of 2008, even though the critical legislations were enacted by FDR, Carter, and Clinton. You want it both ways?
 
Last edited:
MyOwnDrum said:
I see Jimmy Carter is getting his usual bashing in this poll by people who think history started in 1960 and that the worst thing to happen in our history was oil prices going up, a recession, and the hostage crisis in Iran... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Carter pushed universal healthcare and giving mortgages to those who couldn't pay. He's been a general ****up every since he arrived on the scene.
 
Dav said:
Same with 1963-1981, a period of history I am much more familiar with....
Click to expand...

Meh, they all get a bad rap. None of them was particularly terrible. LBJ and Nixon especially...for all their faults (which shouldn't be ignored), they accomplished some great things.

Ford was only there a couple years, and didn't really do anything noteworthy...good OR bad. And as for Carter...He certainly wasn't a good president by any means, but I think the worst you can say about him is that he was ineffective. He didn't do anything truly terrible with reverberations lasting for a long time.

None of them compare to the absolute morons in the White House from 1849-1881 (Lincoln excepted). That era was not one of the United States' finest moments.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Yes, I do.

The Federal Reserve assumed the responsibility for maintaing the money supply.

When it was first created, it opened the spigots and the money flowed...ie, it kept interest rates low and was instrumental in preventing a post-war recession and creating the Roaring Twenties.

Then it got leery about the looming prospect of inflation and shut the money off...ie, jammed interest rates up, causing stock market crashes and runs on banks.
Click to expand...

Nice to see you agree that high interest rates slow the economy, and low interest rates stimulate it. Very Keynesian of you. :mrgreen:

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Why was the Fed created? To provide loans to regional banks to allow them to cover daily operations without cash shortages.

What did the Fed do when runs on the banks began creating cash shortages? It refused to lend the money....proving to the panicked people that their banks were running out of money and they'd better get their money out immediately.

The Fed caused the Depression. There's really no debate about this.
Click to expand...

So then, your argument is that the Fed didn't do ENOUGH. We agree for once! Nice to see such a full-throated endorsement for the Fed's mission from a so-called libertarian!

I'm curious...if you agree that bailing out banks can prevent or mitigate economic recessions, how can you fault Wilson for creating the Fed? The situation couldn't have been any worse than if the Fed hadn't existed. And surely you couldn't expect Wilson to have known that 20 years later, the Fed would be chaired by do-nothing people instead of people who did the job that you and I agree they should have done?
 
Last edited:
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
The Fed caused the Depression. There's really no debate about this.
Click to expand...

51QY96Z005L._SL500_AA240_.jpg


If you can get through all of the economist-speak it's really a great read. There's no doubt as to what caused the Depression.

And as for worst president, it's FDR. Bad idea after bad idea after bad idea and then he ordered a firing squad for the Constitution, which is why our government today has no limits. Oh, and did I mention that his campaign to get elected president was a lie? There is no doubt that this guy was the worst (though Lincoln is close).
 
Kandahar said:
Nice to see you agree that high interest rates cause economic problems. Very Keynesian of you. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

You need to improve your reading skills.


Kandahar said:
So then, your argument is that the Fed didn't do ENOUGH. We agree for once! Nice to see such a full-throated endorsement for the Fed's mission from a so-called libertarian!
Click to expand...

No, my argument was that the Fed CAUSED the Depression.

Run along and buy a dictionary.

If the Fed hadn't existed, the Depression could not have happened. Local failures could have occurred in specific economic sectors, a prolonged nationwide collapse across all sectors would not have been possible.

Like I said, learn how to read.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
You need to improve your reading skills.




No, my argument was that the Fed CAUSED the Depression.

Run along and buy a dictionary.

If the Fed hadn't existed, the Depression could not have happened. Local failures could have occurred in specific economic sectors, a prolonged nationwide collapse across all sectors would not have been possible.

Like I said, learn how to read.
Click to expand...

You said that A) the Fed was created to provide loans to banks, B) the Fed was not loaning enough to banks during the Great Depression. That hardly sounds like a rational argument against the Fed's existence. That sounds like you want to out-Fed the Fed. And I would agree. They didn't expand the money supply NEARLY enough during the Depression, which certainly exacerbated the problem.

How do you then conclude that the Depression could not have happened without the Fed? You stated that the economy was worse because the Fed wasn't loaning money to banks and allowed them to collapse. If the Fed hadn't existed (and thus, there had been no one to fulfill the objective of loaning money to banks, as you stated), how would the economy be better off? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Yes, I do.

The Federal Reserve assumed the responsibility for maintaing the money supply.

When it was first created, it opened the spigots and the money flowed...ie, it kept interest rates low and was instrumental in preventing a post-war recession and creating the Roaring Twenties.

Then it got leery about the looming prospect of inflation and shut the money off...ie, jammed interest rates up, causing stock market crashes and runs on banks.

Why was the Fed created? To provide loans to regional banks to allow them to cover daily operations without cash shortages.

What did the Fed do when runs on the banks began creating cash shortages? It refused to lend the money....proving to the panicked people that their banks were running out of money and they'd better get their money out immediately.

The Fed caused the Depression. There's really no debate about this.

The president has pull. That's his power to affect the Constitutional Amendments. Also, you people blame Bush for the economic failures of 2008, even though the critical legislations were enacted by FDR, Carter, and Clinton. You want it both ways?
Click to expand...

Yeah, under the Clinton Administration, Congress pressured banks to give out higher risk loans to minorities...well...let's just say they should have been renters.
 
Kandahar said:
Meh, they all get a bad rap. None of them was particularly terrible. LBJ and Nixon especially...for all their faults (which shouldn't be ignored), they accomplished some great things.

Ford was only there a couple years, and didn't really do anything noteworthy...good OR bad. And as for Carter...He certainly wasn't a good president by any means, but I think the worst you can say about him is that he was ineffective. He didn't do anything truly terrible with reverberations lasting for a long time.

None of them compare to the absolute morons in the White House from 1849-1881 (Lincoln excepted). That era was not one of the United States' finest moments.
Click to expand...

What did LBJ do that was so great it outweighed the negatives?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
The president has pull. That's his power to affect the Constitutional Amendments.
Click to expand...

The president has as much pull over who wins American Idol as he does over whether a constitutional amendment is approved. What exactly is your objection to women voting? The stupid bitches don't vote the way you think they should?

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Also, you people blame Bush for the economic failures of 2008, even though the critical legislations were enacted by FDR, Carter, and Clinton. You want it both ways?
Click to expand...

Who is "you people"? :confused:
 
Last edited:
pro-bipartisan said:
What did LBJ do that was so great it outweighed the negatives?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say he did anything that outweighed the negatives. But the civil rights movement pulls him up from being a terrible president to being a slightly-below-average president.
 
Kandahar said:
You said that A) the Fed was created to provide loans to banks, B) the Fed was not loaning enough to banks during the Great Depression. That hardly sounds like a rational argument against the Fed's existence. That sounds like you want to out-Fed the Fed. And I would agree. They didn't expand the money supply NEARLY enough during the Depression, which certainly exacerbated the problem.

What it sounds like is that you're choosing to ignore all of what was said except those parts you feel implies an inconsistency in a philosophy you're not capable of understanding, and meanwhile, you're refusing to grasp the gestalt of what was said.

Kandahar said:
How do you then conclude that the Depression could not have happened without the Fed? You stated that the economy was worse because the Fed wasn't loaning money to banks and allowed them to collapse. If the Fed hadn't existed (and thus, there had been no one to fulfill the objective of loaning money to banks, as you stated), how would the economy be better off? :confused:
Click to expand...


See what I mean? Did I not say that regional failures may have occured on the sector level? Did you miss that part? That's what normally happens in recessions. The Federal Reserve managed to turn a regular old recession into the worst economic disaster in history. ONLY the Fed was able to make the nation's entire economy collapse.
Click to expand...
 
Kandahar said:
What exactly is your objection to women voting? They don't vote the way you think they should?
Click to expand...

FYI he's already said that he meant the 18th amendment, not the 19th.
 
EpicDude86 said:
Awwwww **** dawg. He better not be talking about us. And by us I mean us blacks. Cause, I am black. Well 1/16th but it still counts.
Click to expand...

My ancestors came from Africa, too.

They stopped in Ireland for twenty thousand years, but they were from Africa originally.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
What it sounds like is that you're choosing to ignore all of what was said except those parts you feel implies an inconsistency in a philosophy you're not capable of understanding, and meanwhile, you're refusing to grasp the gestalt of what was said.




See what I mean? Did I not say that regional failures may have occured on the sector level? Did you miss that part? That's what normally happens in recessions. The Federal Reserve managed to turn a regular old recession into the worst economic disaster in history. ONLY the Fed was able to make the nation's entire economy collapse.
Click to expand...

HOW did the Fed turn regional problems into a national crisis?
HOW would not having a Fed at all be superior to having a timid Fed, when you agree that the goal of loaning money to prevent bank runs is a worthy goal?
And WHY has their only been one depression (which you and I agree was exacerbated by the Fed not loaning ENOUGH money) in the nearly 100 years since the Fed was established, instead of one every 10-15 years as was the norm prior to the establishment of the Fed?
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
I wouldn't say he did anything that outweighed the negatives. But the civil rights movement pulls him up from being a terrible president to being a slightly-below-average president.
Click to expand...

Getting the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed over the filibuster lead by his own party is a serious plus.

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was fifty minuses.

The Great Society, unconstitutional and failure, was a major minus.

Overall, LBJ sucked.
 
Kandahar said:
HOW did the Fed turn regional problems into a national crisis?
HOW would not having a Fed at all be superior to having a timid Fed, when you agree that the goal of loaning money to prevent bank runs is a worthy goal?
And WHY has their only been one depression (which you and I agree was exacerbated by the Fed not loaning ENOUGH money) in the nearly 100 years since the Fed was established, instead of one every 10-15 years as was the norm prior to the establishment of the Fed?
Click to expand...

My question is why is the FED a private bank?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom