• 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 20th Century President

Worst 20th Century President


  • Total voters
    112
The Fed also signifcantly raised interest rates. Thanks to Harding's hands off approach, the market mostly recovered by 1923, years before Europe

Yes, since we weren't bombed, and we didn't fight trench warfare on our front yard...
 
The fact that we were tied into the world economy means we went down along with it. Europe hurt us, since it's economy was devastated by WWI. We were pretty lucky to have our industry on the other side of the Atlantic, or we would have had a lot more damage done to our economy. Anyway, since we were tied into Europe's economy, when they started experiencing economic growth, around 1926 or so, we were well out of the recession.

That doesn't explain why we got out of it so quickly, even without all of these drastic measures you say that we have to take.
 
Yes, since we weren't bombed, and we didn't fight trench warfare on our front yard...

We still got out ofa massive recession fairly quickly
 
I think it was a theoretical possibility before year 2000 that Bush would become the next president.

So its perfectly valid to vote for Bush also.

He wasn't President until January 21 2001. He was a candidate in 2000, still not President.
 
I don't know about it being "pollitically correct" but I believe America, after 40 years of standing in front of the Soviet Union, deserves a bit of credit for forcing it into the situation that brought the Berlin Wall down. Denying Middle Eastern oil? Aiding Asian militaires? Aiding Afghani fighters? Beating the influential race in the Middle East? Denying them access in the South Americas? Embarrasing them over the Cuban Missle Crisis? Glamorizing has nothing to do with it.

Forcing it into WHAT situation? None of those things you mentioned had any kind of real effect on the soviet economy anywhere near as much as their own system and 40 years worth of mismanagement did. The decades long international welfare they provided for dozens of countries ranging in everything from their own oil to food, vehicles and military support drained their economy and made it impossible for them to sustain themselves. That is what brought about the collapse of the soviets.

The USSR became a massive bureaucracy that while to an extent highly effective during the first half of the 20th century became impossible to manage on long term. Not only because it was too large but because many of the bureaucrats and military elite in the Kremlin were more interest in siphoning money from the system than in socialism. If you want to argue that America didn't really make things easier for them, that is fine. But arguing that we brought down what was a clumsy and already bleeding giant is pure dishonesty.

But groveling to the opinions of international feelings about how America is supposed to be denied any credit is politically correct, isn't it?

Which international opinions? You mean those of anybody who understands the cold war beyond the established Reagan mythology held by anybody on the right? Well if you say so.
 
BS. 40 years of denying the Soviets their party is exactly what saw them overburdened and at an end. Reagan was the icing. "Politicial correctness" has people seeking anything that will agree with international anti-American cheers these days.

Tell you what....you take America out of the equation going back to 1945 and consider where the Soviet Union would be in 1989.

You are right, 40 years of the cold war was a big part of why the Soviet Union collapsed. But there is a reason why it was them that collapsed and not us, and a big part of that reason is them. I have not denied, now will I that we played a large roll in it, but it is not some how political correctness to say that they had a big hand in their own demise.
 
That doesn't explain why we got out of it so quickly, even without all of these drastic measures you say that we have to take.

Because if I understand it correctly, the recession was mostly the result of transitioning from a war-based economy. That is something that the market can handle much easier than the catastrophic meltdown that was the Great Depression.
 
Because if I understand it correctly, the recession was mostly the result of transitioning from a war-based economy. That is something that the market can handle much easier than the catastrophic meltdown that was the Great Depression.

Why should that change anything? I thought that recessions were because of insufficient demand. :roll:
 
Why should that change anything? I thought that recessions were because of insufficient demand. :roll:

Recessions are based on lots of things, and each recession can be caused by different situations. Let's not try to oversimplify things here.
 
Recessions are based on lots of things, and each recession can be caused by different situations. Let's not try to oversimplify things here.

So why does the fact that we were coming out of a war change the way that the recession was ultimately ended?
 
I think it was a theoretical possibility before year 2000 that Bush would become the next president.

So its perfectly valid to vote for Bush also.

I follow the rule of when in doubt, always vote for W. :)
 
It doesn't change a thing. We got out of that recession quicker because the burden of government was lessened.

Blaming everything on the amount of government intervention is simplistic and ignores many other more important factors.
 
Blaming everything on the amount of government intervention is simplistic and ignores many other more important factors.

Complexity for complexity sake isn't much of an argument.
 
Relevance to what I was referring to is none.

All that you said was that it was too simplistic, but you've yet to mention how those other factors (you've only mentioned that it was a shift from war production to consumer production) made this recession so much shorter in duration.
 
Hands down, Warren G. Harding is the worst president of the 20th century.

Its like having Jack Abramoff, Bernie Madoff, and Rod Blagojevich as the president at the same time.
 
Hoover, but Nixon and LBJ come in closely behind...
 
Worst 20th Century President.

I've explained why I believe that Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan violated their oaths and subverted the U.S. Constitution. They were more than merely criminal in their acts, they were traitorous.

I think at the least some of those who voted ‘James Earl Carter’ as the worst president of the 20th century, namely, Agent Ferris, apdst, bicycleman, Dav, EpicDude86, Goshin, LadyLiberty, LaMidRighter, Missouri Mule, Partisan, Porchev, ptif219, Redress, Vader, should explain their vote and help us understand just what acts he committed that in their eyes causes him to deserve this scourge.
 
I've explained why I believe that Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan violated their oaths and subverted the U.S. Constitution. They were more than merely criminal in their acts, they were traitorous.

I think at the least some of those who voted ‘James Earl Carter’ as the worst president of the 20th century, namely, Agent Ferris, apdst, bicycleman, Dav, EpicDude86, Goshin, LadyLiberty, LaMidRighter, Missouri Mule, Partisan, Porchev, ptif219, Redress, Vader, should explain their vote and help us understand just what acts he committed that in their eyes causes him to deserve this scourge.

All of the 20th century presidents violated their oath of office. :roll:
 
I've explained why I believe that Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan violated their oaths and subverted the U.S. Constitution. They were more than merely criminal in their acts, they were traitorous.

I think at the least some of those who voted ‘James Earl Carter’ as the worst president of the 20th century, namely, Agent Ferris, apdst, bicycleman, Dav, EpicDude86, Goshin, LadyLiberty, LaMidRighter, Missouri Mule, Partisan, Porchev, ptif219, Redress, Vader, should explain their vote and help us understand just what acts he committed that in their eyes causes him to deserve this scourge.

In a word, Iran.
 
All of the 20th century presidents violated their oath of office. :roll:

Care to back that up? That every President since 1900, and until 1999 has violated his oath of office?
 
Back
Top Bottom