Ferdinand Marcos would get my vote.
[sub]Hey, the O.P. didn’t specify U.S. Presidents.[/sub]
You know what Red Menace, you crack me up. You are now officially my favorite Doper! BTW, I also find your name to be great!
I would not disagree with your assessment of Nixon up until your analysis of his role in the Eisenhower presidency. One of the most damning events of Nixon’s unsuccesful 1960 bid was Eisenhower’s response to the question of what key issues he’d consulted with Nixon on: “Give me some time, I’ll think of one.” (Paraphrased).
Okay, if we’re not talking US presidents, how about Anastacio Somoza (Sr. AND Jr.), Augusto Pinochet and Fulgencio Batista?
Harding, Carter, and Clinton. Not necessarily in that order.
Harding and Carter were simply in over their heads. Harding realized it, Carter did not.
Carter was one of those people “with lots of intelligence and absoutely no brains”, in Joseph Heller’s phrase. He expected that being President was going to be like being governor of Georgia, only more so. He actually believed his own rhetoric, and was lucky enough to run as an outsider for the only job in American for which a lack of experience is considered a plus.
Clinton approached the Presidency in the same frame of mind he did everything else. “How can I get re-elected?” His greatest achievements in office were 1) welfare reform, which he fought tooth and nail until he realized it was going forward without him, so he better grab the credit, 2) turning control of Congress over to the Republicans, and 3) NAFTA, which he brought about with the Republicans’ assistance.
Thank God America is strong enough to survive even these clowns.
Regards,
Shodan
Doesn’t anybody read OPs anymore? Shodan? Razor?
For the record:
Carter was an ineffective wimp.
Reagan was an evil mastermind and/or a senile old fool.
Bush was a CIA war criminal.
Clinton was a lying, disgraceful lech.
Bush 2 is the pawn of Big Business and an illegitimate usurper.
Now that we have all that out of the way, perhaps we can deal with the OP.
I think Reagan was much worse than Clinton (who I didn’t particularly like either). I don’t think either of them are the worst presidents in American history, though. They lack the truly inspired awfulness of Harding and Buchanan.
Harding: not only was he corrupt and ineffective, but rumor has it that he actually was inducted into the KKK in the White House.
And BS I guess you want a slaveholding Southern state and a Nazi-controlled Europe. Plus, what were Nixon’s actual accomplishments in office? Prolonging the Vietnam conflict with his “Secret Plan?” Popularizing the movie “Deep Throat?”
Yeah! And that bitch FDR who thought he was sooooo cool he could completely ignore the 22nd amendment!
Razor- asserting that white American males are concerned only with the economy is tantamount to asserting that all blacks are lazy and Hispanics thieves.
Now, my two cents:
Reagan- Was in past 20 years and boosted the economy. Can’t have been worst president.
Bush I- Also within past 20 years, and taught Saddam not to mess with international interests.
As for worst…What exactly did Pierce do? Anything?
It’s got to be Hoover. He was so wedded to his laissez faire ideology that he wasn’t willing to implement even the most basic reforms when the entire economy was going down the tubes. One of the few problems with the American system is that it makes the people wait for four long years before they can punt clowns like this guy out of office.
And running a close second would have to be Reagan. I might have been willing to ignore the dozens of corrupt appointees, the Iran-Contra affair, the massive deficit spending, the unnecessary military incursions at hot spots all over the world, the enormous corporate handouts, the aid to our enemies in the Middle East, the beginning of the policy of selling White House access to the highest bidder, the failure to handle the AIDS crisis, the escalation of the War on Drugs beyond any reasonable limit, the belief that longer sentences alone were the only solution to crime, and the numerous lies about his background, if only he had treated the American people like mature adults rather than just acting like none of us understood what was really going on.
I’m just curious as to what criteria for “worst president” are being used.
And though I was tempted to suggest Dubya, objectively I don’t think he’d be the worst president ever – Nixon and Reagan certainly would provide plenty of competition.
Barking Spider’s nomination of Lincoln is laughably ludicrous.
I believe that particular rumor is attributed to Wilson and not Harding. Whether that particular bit of information is true about Wilson I am not sure. I don’t know if Harding was a racist or not. Wilson did far more to damage race relations and make life miserable for black Americans then any other president this century. Harding beat out Wilson’s would be successor James Cox.
Marc
Andrew Jackson
The trail of tears
enuff said
What sticks in my mind about Hoover is that he called out troops to chase away the Bonus Marchers. Here were veterans, at the absolute ends of their ropes, in the middle of the Depression. And Hoover called in the troops and burned their encampment - by sheer luck only one of the vets was killed. But some of them lost everything but the clothes on their backs, because everything they owned was in a tent that went up in flames.
This is the same man who, years earlier, had authorized aid to Finland after it declared independence from Russia. So he did have some human emotions, once. I just don’t get it :mad:
Don’t know if that makes him the worst US President ever, but it certainly puts him up there in the top 5 or so.
Well, at least Marcos had enough smarts to hold on to power for two decades. Joseph Estrada, the bumbling idiot, could hardly manage two years.
Woodrow Wilson’s spectacular incompetence in foreign policy in 1918 deserves a mention.
I think we should all be glad there was never a President Goldwater.
I dunno. Anyone who passes out bumper stickers with “AuH[sub]2[/sub]O” on it can’t be all bad.
My vote: The worst was J.F.Kennedy, followed by Lyndon Johnson.Kennedy was totally incompetant, tho good-looking. He almost brought the country into WWIII, not once, but TWICE (Berlin Wall and Cuba). He also jumped into the quicksand of Vietnam, which ultimately cost 60,000 US lives (and possibly 1,000,000 Vietnamese lives). Johnson continued the fiasco-pouring BILLIONS of dollars into the Vietnam war (the ultimate effect was to make South vietnamese generals rich, and certain defence contractors as well).The net effect of these two morons? Greatly damaged US prestige, a military almost destroyed, and a HUGE addition to the national debt! And some people consider these crooks to be HEROES??
Of course, Johnson was worried about Republicans calling him “soft on Communism” if he didn’t do anything (remember Truman in Korea?) Also, he thought he might have won. But it was a terrible thing, I’m not backing him up on that. He did get the Civil Rights Acts pushed through, though, and I think only he could have done that. I’m thinking that little accomplishment prevents him from being the worst ever.