this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
1003 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19239 readers
2419 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Fox News reported on some new presidential rankings, which purportedly show Barack Obama as the #6 president in U.S. history and Donald Trump dead last, and MAGA was not happy.

Fox News on Sunday posted an article about the new rankings by the Presidential Greatness Project, which Fox describes as "a group of self-styled experts." It states that Abraham "Lincoln topped the list of presidents in the 2024 Presidential Greatness Project expert survey for the third time, following his top spot in the rankings in the 2015 and 2018 versions of the survey."

...

"Rounding out the top five in the rankings were Franklin Delano Roosevelt at number two, George Washington at three, Theodore Roosevelt at four, and Thomas Jefferson at five," according to the report. "Trump was ranked in last place in the survey, being ranked worse than James Buchanan at 44, Andrew Johnson at 43, Franklin Pierce at 42, and William Henry Harrison at 41."

The report states that Obama and Joe Biden "ranked an average of 6th and 13th, respectively, among Democrat respondents, and 15th and 30th by Republicans."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Not even remotely. Without massive help from the Republican party, he would have gotten nothing accomplished. Despite being the second coming of Reagan. Even Reagan was far worse than Trump. The collective efforts of the Bush family over the last 100 years dwarf and are also part of Reagan's legacy.

Don't get me wrong. Trump is awful. The Republican party is the problem however. They could stop him at a moment's notice and kick him out. But they refuse to simply because their monster got away from them. And he's currently got control.

[–] Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The Republican party is the problem however. They could stop him at a moment’s notice and kick him out.

So, we have a two party system because FPTP voting always collapses into one given enough time. But there's no requirement that those two parties be "Democrats" and "Republicans", especially not as you know them now.

The GOP is worried that Trump's cult is large enough that if they tried to boot him out directly that it would cause a massive party split of the sort that leads to a decade or so having three parties (and Democrats winning a lot because the right wing vote is split) until either the GOP or MAGA comes out on top and absorbs the other - and they aren't sure MAGA wouldn't win that in the end.

It's better for the GOP long term if they let him tucker himself out or ideally get criminally convicted of things that make him ineligible under 14A Sec 3 in the hopes they can fold much of the cult back into their numbers but keep them politically active. If he gets barred under 14A Sec 3 then the GOP can get cultists to vote for them under claims that they'll fix that, and then just not bother to.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

That's cynical thinking and it's untrue. He can do a lot of damage in the interim. It would be worse than 20 to 30 years in the wilderness. Especially seeing as a Democratic party isn't a solid cohesive group itself. It's already a coalition party. And if there were less pressure to force a lot of us together, we'd split into other parties ourselves and pursue goals that actually align with our beliefs. For a lot of people including myself. Democrats simply represent a slower, slightly more humane slide into fascism.

We're literally staring down the barrel at the end of democracy. As they try to play chicken with the lead addled losers they've engineered. Thinking to themselves "hey, maybe if we keep our heads down and keep enabling them we can be in charge of whatever is left someday" That shit isn't rational, or reasonable. Especially considering how many Democrats would sorely love to work with them again if they just kicked the greasy toad to the side of the road.

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

You’ve put the cart before the horse. It’s trump who controls the republicans. It’s the republicans who need him, not the other way around. It’s he who has co-opted them. And, no, Reagan, evil though he was, did not damage the Republic like Trump has. Bush, the insipid fool that he was, hasn’t attempted to bring down the Republic. Trump very nearly succeeded in doing that. In destroying America. And he very well might still achieve it.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Nope. Literally it isn't. They could kick him to the curb at any point. If he's controlling them, why did he do largely what they wanted in office. Yes they throw red meat to the morons too. But make no mistake as to who's in control. It's still the same wealthy people who were before.

All Trump has done is give the permission to openly be themselves. They're still the same crazies they were before he got in office.