Will there ever be a Great President ever again?

Great Debates
1

With close media scrutiny and the 24 hour news cycle creating this vacuum that sucks up any news story that exists, I don’t think we ever will. JFK was the last to get away with it and that’s mostly because he was shot and it was the great American tragedy. He was a good president and he was able to take advantage of television before it became a detriment.

Moreover, with the internet and the thought that 200 people saying something on twitter equals a whole mob of people actually being upset and having a justified opinion on something, literally EVERYTHING will be critiqued and picked apart to the end of time.

If the freaking Great Leader emerged from the woodwork and gathered huge social ideas and pushed for a progressive society, there’d be one person talking about how the Bible described the antiChrist in a similar way, one person saying the person was “fucking gay as hell”, and one person complaining about how there’s not a SINGLE gender-fluid pan-Asian on his cabinet. And all their tweets would be read by CNN.

2

It could happen. If the Congress was willing to work with him or her, and if there were really big, hairy, ugly issues that seriously needed work.

Things are ugly now because we can afford for them to be. The whole Clinton sex scandal was top news because nothing else was. Trivial scandals are an indication of good times.

If Putin marched into Latvia, I think the Congress – even today’s Congress – would fall in right behind Obama.

3

Well personally I dont think we are electing the best and brightest to be president anymore.

Thing is people all have things they have regretted done in their past and if you run for President - that will come out. Remember when they announced Sarah Ferguson for VP candidate the next day 200 reporters showed up in her small town in Alaska to interview everyone and dig up whatever dirt on her or her family they could find.

Plus working your way up the political ladder nowadays takes a mix of talent, charm, luck, and smarts. Some government leaders are great at their job but lack good people skills and dislike the whole campaigning thing. Some politicians have awesome people skills and make great speeches but suck at their jobs.

4

I don’t want a Great President, I want a Good President. “Does not actively support committing war crimes” is not an unreasonable standard to judge your Commander-in-Chief by, yet for the past 14 years the President has failed even that basic test - first Bush and the invasion of Iraq on false pretenses, and then Obama and his administration’s explicit protection of CIA torturers and war on the whistleblowers who out them.

5

No president is canonized during his lifetime. FDR, an undisputed “great,” was widely despised in his time and the media pulled its punches a lot less with him than you’d think. Reagan, a horrible president in my estimation, had a lot of larger-than-life qualities that subsequent generations do and will continue to yearn for in a chief executive. I prefer an effective POTUS to a charismatic one, but history isn’t written by guys like me.

6

Um, I’m assuming you meant Sarah Palin. ?

7

Hee hee, sorry, I’m picturing Sarah Fergueson as McCain’s VP, and I’m unreasonably amused.

8

Great circumstances create great presidents and the greatness is never universally recognized at the time. (This does not mean that whomever happens to have his ass sitting in the Oval Office will always rise to the occasion, great opportunities are often unrecognized or squandered.)

9

DOH! (slapping head)

10

Or declare their loyalty to Russia.

11

I don’t think Dr. Doom would allow that.

12

No,invading Latvia wouldn’t create “great circumstances”…it would be a minor, local blip. Like the war in Serbia a coulple decades ago, or the problems now in Ukraine…

That’s the difference between then and now. Then— say, FDR’s era, or JFK’s, there were truly great circumstances, great issues at stake. A leader with vision affected the course of history.

Today, there are no such great issues on the line. There are no specific enemies to fight, or specific ways to even measure if we win on a certain issue.

Technology? There is no space race, no need for a JFK to proclaim that we’re striving for the moon.
Just gradually improving electronics for everybody.

Civil rights? There is no need for an inspirational leader like Martin Luther King to proclaim “I have a dream”.Just a gradual and quiet set of improvements for gays.

War? Unlike WW II and the cold war, we now have terrorism, which has turned out to be a vague enemy, hard to locate for a fight. No need for an FDR or Churchill to display great leadership and inspire masses of citizens to volunteer; just launch a few drones.

So, in answer to the OP–we could one day have another Great President, but only if one day society is challenged with great circumstances.

If terrorists ever bring an entire country to its knees, or if we ever have masses of hungry people in the streets, (maybe due to economic collapse, or climate change)—we may see a leader arise who will go down in history as “Great”.
But let’s hope we never need to find out.

13

No,invading Latvia wouldn’t create “great circumstances”…it would be a minor, local blip. Like the war in Serbia a coulple decades ago, or the problems now in Ukraine…

That’s the difference between then and now. Then— say, FDR’s era, or JFK’s, there were truly great circumstances, great issues at stake. A leader with vision affected the course of history.

Today, there are no such great issues on the line. There are no specific enemies to fight, or specific ways to even measure if we win on a certain issue.

Technology? There is no space race, no need for a JFK to proclaim that we’re striving for the moon.
Just gradually improving electronics for everybody.

Civil rights? There is no need for an inspirational leader like Martin Luther King to proclaim “I have a dream”.Just a gradual and quiet set of improvements for gays.

War? Unlike WW II and the cold war, we now have terrorism, which has turned out to be a vague enemy, hard to locate for a fight. No need for an FDR or Churchill to display great leadership and inspire masses of citizens to volunteer; just launch a few drones.

So, in answer to the OP–we could one day have another Great President, but only if one day society is challenged with great circumstances.

If terrorists ever bring an entire country to its knees, or if we ever have masses of hungry people in the streets, (maybe due to economic collapse, or climate change)—we may see a leader arise who will go down in history as “Great”.

And let’s hope we never need to find out. :slight_smile:

14

Doom, of course, is king of Latveria, not Latvia.

And since invading Latveria would result in Russia’s defeat, Putin is too smart to try.

15

ooops…I feel wooshed!
I wish I had know that was a reference, before I typed the first couple sentence of post #13…
:smack:

(but the rest of my post still holds water… I hope)

16

There is the plutocracy.

17

This. Wishing for a great president reminds me of the “Chinese” curse “May you live in interesting times”.

18

We say there’s no “Great Circumstances” but I think someone that someone could certainly rally the frustrated generation coming up and currently in their 20s/30s to fight against:

  • NSA spying
  • Socioeconomic inequality
  • Failing education systems
  • Failing inner cities
  • The lost war on drugs
  • Wall Street regulation
  • Money in politics
  • Mass incarceration
  • Non-universal healthcare

Whether you think these are “real issues” or not, I think we still live in a society with a lot problems left to deal with. The question is that even if we find this great leader of men, would they survive the intense amount of scrutiny, even if they start fixing the problems? I’m certainly sure whatever deal they strike to get it through wouldn’t please the radical progressives.

I think we’ve yet to see the first great “Internet politician” - one who was raised with the internet their entire lives and really understands how great of a tool it can be (and how much of a detriment it can be as well). However, I think even if that person came along, they’d still be hammered beyond recognition by the end of their term.

19

None of those things are really acute problems that affect the entire nation, in the way that say… the Great Depression, the Civil War, and World War II did. Not that it’s right, but most of them affect a relatively small proportion of the population and that small proportion is overwhelmingly composed of one or two ethnic minorities.

What’s in it for the other 70% of the country to rally around some President to solve those things? Likely higher taxes and some level of government intrusion that will be viewed as oppressive or unjust. (think of the griping about Affirmative Action, for an example).

I think the “internet president” will sort of organically happen as the electorate changes. In another 20-30 years, it’ll be the way things are, but right now, it’s a stupid play, because the internet skews young at the moment, and old farts do most of the voting- people who still read printed newspapers. Having a twitter-savvy President doesn’t do a damn thing for them, but they’re much more likely to vote relative to the twenty-somethings who tweet all day long.

20

She got remarried?