1003
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
1003 points (96.9% liked)
politics
19239 readers
2410 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Here's the full combined list:
Source: http://www.brandonrottinghaus.com/uploads/1/0/8/7/108798321/presidential_greatness_white_paper_2024.pdf
How the fuck is Reagan top 20
America is a sad place.
Historians create the list, so sometimes it is about the history these Presidents lived through. Reagan is seen as an element in the fall of the Soviet Union, and thus the recreation of many countries and world order.
Puts him at about average. Reagan represents a brand of conservatism that many disagree with but that doesn’t inherently make him a bad president.
This should really worry Republicans. Apparently this came from surveying people. If Reagan is 16 , and Obama is 7, and Trump is absolutely last, it says a whole fucking lot about the electorate.
Edit: I'm mistaken, it's political science folks. So probably not as worrying to them.
I've met many people in real life who seem to believe Reagon is great due to his "very successful" Reaganomics. I don't know if they actually knew what Reaganomics really was or the results of it.
Yeah. Most of what is wrong now can be traced to Reagan.
That is why I would rate him even lower than Trump.
I'm glad to see Trump acknowledge and celebrate his place at the bottom of the list.
Some of these positions are a bit… subjective? Obama over LBJ?
The whole thing is subjective, they were rankings done by survey. No one is trying to hide that
You mean the guy who got the job cuz someone died, and then started the Vietnam War?
JFK definitely started the war. LBJ and Nixon just escalated it
He’s got a lot of social reform under his belt. You could argue a lot of that is from JFK. His international politics, not so much
I mean you couldn't argue that very well. Anyone who thinks LBJ wasn't largely a driving force behind social reform is insane. I mean personally he pushed a lot of that through. I doubt Kennedy could have.
He pushed it through because he had the career politician connections, which was admittedly 100% invaluable to actually get it done. But the vision came from Kennedy and LBJ largely carried out as Kennedy's legacy rather than Johnson's own cause.
In other words, he has large error bars that average out to OK.
To be fair Obama did end the war his predecessor started.
To also be fair, the US and NATO pulled out fast and let the Taliban take over a place we never should have been in the first place, making it even worse for the people there.
We all know Daddy Bush fucked this up, but the US left a huge mess they didn’t clean up.
Obama was the first President from a minority part of a population and signed Obamacare.
Well, the first part certainly is important. But isn’t related to “greatness” in terms of accomplishments during a presidency. Obamacare definitely counts. Also the repeal of DADT.
But during LBJ, black voting rights, Medicare and Medicaid, and making discrimination illegal (especially employer discrimination).
It’s all very subjective as I said earlier. But there would be no Obama without LBJ.
This list is created by historians. So, it is history of the time and President that is considered.
What you say about LBJ is mostly true, though it was JFK that set those programs in motion in Congress. But, what LBJ also did was entrench the US in a very unpopular war. So much so, he refused to run for a final term.
Which is why I mentioned JFK.
Carter #1 in our hearts
He may be the best human being in the office. He micromanaged his staff--he required personal signing off on the White House tennis court usage--and never figured out the sausage making process with Congress. His actual accomplishments were limited.
Presidental history isn't my strongest area, but I'd bump up Eisenhauer before Truman.
I feel the jump after #5 is a pretty sizeable one.
I'm trying to justify moving down GHWB and Jackson, but looking at who comes in after them, it's hard to come up with anything to put them over either of them.
Looking at the list objectively, it's pretty amazing the combined list of terrible things we can list off that all these people did. The tops 5 included. But I feel those are the only ones I can say what they did was so monumental that the country was better off after their terms and I wonder if we would ever get a leader like any of them again.
Still sad to see the amount of slavery and war crimes in the top 5 though.
Wtf? Reagan should be a lot lower.
That’s a lot higher than I’d put the guy who so “skillfully” handled the panic of 1837.
Okay, so is this list wrong, or is the article wrong?
why did they only rank top 45? such a specific number.
Because Grover Cleveland fucked it all up by serving non-consecutive terms.
They should have ranked his 1st and 2nd terms individually smdh
dinglebutt would have been lower, but there were only that many eligible names this go-around.