90 year anniversary thread: The REAL Mt. Rushmore, Phase 2:

Politics & Elections
1

No, this is not one of THOSE “Mount Rushmore” threads. Its the 90th anniversary of the commemoration of the Mount Rushmore Monument so I have a legit reason to bring this up!

http://www.philly.com/philly/living/travel/20150319_ap_f0d227315f6544dfa93da0c2c4d952a0.html
. . . .and granted, President Coolidge had 138 years of history to go back on, here Im asking us to build a second MR with only 90 . . though we can try and forecast into the future with two candidates . . . . .

To me, three no-brainers would be:

Franklin Delano Roosevelt
John F Kennedy
Ronald Reagan (Liberals may bristle, but as history moves on, one of the most likable and popular Presidents ever, despite his politics)

Who would be #4?

My first instinct would be Dwight Eisenhower. Not only was he a famous WW2 general, but a fairly popular cold war two term President. But wait . . .

Barack Obama? The first black President, and a two time elected one at that. Might be too soon for many, though if we wait another 48 years, not so much so.

OR what if Hillary Clinton gets elected, and wins two terms, and is the first Woman President? Who do we bump off?

Reagan? Ike?

I bet there might be votes for Harry S Truman too.

Presidents I can NEVER see getting on the cliff are:

HERBERT HOOVER
LYNDON JOHNSON
GERALD FORD
JIMMY CARTER
EITHER OF THE BUSHES
BILL CLINTON

Let the debate begin! :smiley:

2

You should only put Reagan on a monument if you’re jonesing to have it suitcase-nuked in its first ten years.

FDR and JFK, fine. I’m so-so about Clinton. Eisenhower wouldn’t be totally objectionable.

3

I wouldn’t put JFK or RWR on the monument. JFK’s claim is based on what? The space program? He really didn’t give two shits about the science, he just wanted to beat the USSR. Reagan was too divisive and his legacy is the “there’s a free lunch and we’re going to eat it” crowd.

My picks:

1- Franklin Roosevelt. You have Washington, Lincoln, and FDR as the essential presidents.

2- Lyndon Johnson. Medicare and Civil Rights. Sure, Vietnam was a black hole but on the whole, a true giant. My only reservation would be if the stone could support the massive ears.

3- Martin Luther King. Another essential figure in history, imagine if he didn’t preach non-violence.

4- John Glenn. Astronaut hero, distinguished Senator.

4

My picks: FDR, DDE, LBJ, BHO.

5

No JFK.

FDR, Ike, LBJ, and… I dunno. I guess I’d have to go with Clinton. Politics would dictate that Reagan would be it, but he fucking shouldn’t be.

6

I agree no JFK. He’s more known for being handsome and having been killed.

Reagan… iffy. He was very popular, but not really a GREAT president. Obama? Only if you feel the need for a token black.

I dunno. I think it’s wrong to pick an arbitrary number and then squeeze some presidents in to fit the bill. I say pick the great presidents, and end up with whatever number of them you end up with.

7

nm

8

The only thing wrong with the existing Mt. Rushmore is that the lesser Roosevelt is on it.

Of the Presidents in the past 90 years, FDR is the only one that unquestionably belongs on a Mt. Rushmore, old or new.

I think Truman, Ike, and Clinton were good Presidents, but not Rushmore material. It’s too soon to have a good perspective on Obama, but I’d say he’s likely to wind up in that group.

And for most of the other post-Rushmore Presidents, the Truman-Ike-Clinton group constitutes the ceiling for how good they might be considered. Bush the Elder, Carter, Coolidge, JFK, Ford, Hoover, Nixon, Dubya…OK, we’ve found the floor too.

There are really only two arguable candidates for Rushmore since FDR: LBJ and Reagan. But I wouldn’t include either of them.

LBJ? I’m a big fan of what he did domestically, but the carnage in Vietnam can’t be overlooked. A lot of people lost their lives on account of the Vietnam War, and the fact that most of them were Vietnamese shouldn’t lower our estimation of the cost of that war.

Reagan? Domestically, his Presidency looks like a success if you attribute the good years to him, but blame the recession on Carter. (There’s a better argument for attributing both to the Fed.) But he set in motion the forces that have been widening inequalities of weath and income to this day. And in foreign policy, two words: Iran-Contra. He presided over an Administration that was just as crooked in its way as Nixon’s was.

So if someone wanted to add FDR to the existing Mt. Rushmore, or replace Teddy with FDR, I’d be good with that. But there isn’t material for a whole new Mt. Rushmore. Forget it.

9

I don’t get this.:confused:
I would not add anyone to Mt Rushmore. I would have preferred that the mountain had never been carved up in the first place.

My opinion might change if there really is a secret nuke base in Washington’s head, and missile exhaust comes out of all of their noses. Maybe.:stuck_out_tongue:

10

Yeah, I’d vote for him to be on a new monument if we only have the last 90 years to pick from. I think he’s one of the most underrated presidents. If we are going based on a popularity contest then of course FDR and Reagan are going to be on there, but I’d probably not pick either if it were up to me. Ike? Maybe. Definitely not LBJ or JFK, and certainly not either of the Bush presidents (though Bush the elder COULD have been a contender), Carter, Clinton, Ford or Obama (though he coulda been…).

Just not a lot of choices for great presidents who should be immortalized in stone in the last 90 years, sadly.

11

Rather than continue the deification of politicians, I’d be in favor of winging a missile at Rushmore and ending the tradition.

12

No Nixon? :confused:

13

I thought that was a given!

MLK was not a President but no one in their right mind who would want to get elected would argue that choice.

No doubt being handsome and whacked at a young age has helped influence JFKs standing here, but he was also the first “TV” president and I think would be a shoo in to make it.

LBJ:Conservative as Reagan:Liberals, plus LBJ was not a likable character to boot.

I’m kinda liking FDR+JFK+MLK and willing to take down Gipper, but now I’m wondering is Truman is a better choice than Ike since he was a more memorable Prez. I’m guessing the nookie thing on Hiroshima might be an eyebrow raiser…

14

I’d be flattered.