American Presidents Thread I: What Went Wrong?

[Umeria]

Also very cringe of people to have favorite Presidents when they all sucked. But if I had to suggest one was the best President, William Henry Harrison died after just one month in office. Perhaps that makes him the best President we've ever had (not enough time to do vile shit)

william henry harrison was a genocidal maniac who was known as being the Andrew Jackson of the Northwest before he got into office

so, lincoln still winning the best president contest

No it's Garfield. Endorsed by Frederick Douglass and caused the incredibly corrupt federal appointment process to be reformed. I will die on this hill

[Concejos Unidos]

so, lincoln still winning the best president contest

I always found Lincoln overrated. Not to say his term wasn't a massive positive for the US, but to say that I feel many other presidents in his shoes could have done what he did; especially in terms of handling the war. That's what drives me to admire presidents like FDR more, whose singular vision few other presidents could have accomplished if they were in his shoes.

[Sordhau]

Theodore Roosevelt was the youngest President in U.S. history.

---

---

---

---

---

Also very cringe of people to have favorite Presidents when they all sucked. But if I had to suggest one was the best President, William Henry Harrison died after just one month in office. Perhaps that makes him the best President we've ever had (not enough time to do vile shit)

william henry harrison was a genocidal maniac who was known as being the Andrew Jackson of the Northwest before he got into office

so, lincoln still winning the best president contest

That... isn't really relevant, tbh. He wasn't president when that happen so calling him a bad president for things he did before he was president is... dumb. Really dumb. It's like calling Washington the best president purely because he was the leader of the Continental Army.

[Kowani]

william henry harrison was a genocidal maniac who was known as being the Andrew Jackson of the Northwest before he got into office

so, lincoln still winning the best president contest

No it's Garfield. Endorsed by Frederick Douglass and caused the incredibly corrupt federal appointment process to be reformed. I will die on this hill

garfield would probably have been one of the top-tier presidents if he lived, but he did not (arthur does exceed expectations, but not up to the measure of what garfield would have been)
that said, you always have to be discerning about Gilded Age civil service reform. Some of it is truly well-intentioned belief in good government (Garfield and Arthur), but lots of it is thinly-veiled anti-immigrant diatribe (Greely and Nast)

ofc the actual appointment reforms were...bad, extremely so and didn't really work anyway so that's not a point in his favour at all lmao

william henry harrison was a genocidal maniac who was known as being the Andrew Jackson of the Northwest before he got into office

so, lincoln still winning the best president contest

That... isn't really relevant, tbh. He wasn't president when that happen so calling him a bad president for things he did before he was president is... dumb. Really dumb. It's like calling Washington the best president purely because he was the leader of the Continental Army.

i don't really think that's a helpful view tbh but letting john tyler into the office via an entirely self-inflicted death is still unforgiveable

[Sordhau]

No it's Garfield. Endorsed by Frederick Douglass and caused the incredibly corrupt federal appointment process to be reformed. I will die on this hill

garfield would probably have been one of the top-tier presidents if he lived, but he did not (arthur does exceed expectations, but not up to the measure of what garfield would have been)
that said, you always have to be discerning about Gilded Age civil service reform. Some of it is truly well-intentioned belief in good government (Garfield and Arthur), but lots of it is thinly-veiled anti-immigrant diatribe (Greely and Nast)

ofc the actual appointment reforms were...bad, extremely so and didn't really work anyway so that's not a point in his favour at all lmao

That... isn't really relevant, tbh. He wasn't president when that happen so calling him a bad president for things he did before he was president is... dumb. Really dumb. It's like calling Washington the best president purely because he was the leader of the Continental Army.

i don't really think that's a helpful view tbh but letting john tyler into the office via an entirely self-inflicted death is still unforgiveable

See, now that's more fair.

[Kowani]

so, lincoln still winning the best president contest

I always found Lincoln overrated. Not to say his term wasn't a massive positive for the US, but to say that I feel many other presidents in his shoes could have done what he did; especially in terms of handling the war. That's what drives me to admire presidents like FDR more, whose singular vision few other presidents could have accomplished if they were in his shoes.

that seems...extremely flawed tbh, both in your evaluation of lincoln and especially the idea that fdr had a "singular vision" at all

FDR’s philosophy - government helping people = good - was sound, but in terms of policy he just threw everything at the wall to see what stuck. (and tried to introduce more conservative economic ideals into new deal agencies later on only to get beat back by the political tide) Wilson was really the first president to formulate and implement an economic policy agenda
like i'll accept that most presidents probably couldn't have taken on the depression but that's ironically because they were too ideological, fdr's lack of strong ideology is what makes his response effective

[Concejos Unidos]

[quote="Kowani";p="39650159"
that seems...extremely flawed tbh, both in your evaluation of lincoln and especially the idea that fdr had a "singular vision" at all

FDR’s philosophy - government helping people = good - was sound, but in terms of policy he just threw everything at the wall to see what stuck. (and tried to introduce more conservative economic ideals into new deal agencies later on only to get beat back by the political tide) Wilson was really the first president to formulate and implement an economic policy agenda
like i'll accept that most presidents probably couldn't have taken on the depression but that's ironically because they were too ideological, fdr's lack of strong ideology is what makes his response effective[/quote]
I'll say that I was going to write a bunch of stuff, but got lazy and replaced it with "singular vision," so it's not a particularly accurate turn of phrase. Point is, FDR at least had the willingness to push for a bunch of very new economic policies, in a way that most presidents I don't think could have.

[Kowani]

[quote="Kowani";p="39650159"
that seems...extremely flawed tbh, both in your evaluation of lincoln and especially the idea that fdr had a "singular vision" at all

FDR’s philosophy - government helping people = good - was sound, but in terms of policy he just threw everything at the wall to see what stuck. (and tried to introduce more conservative economic ideals into new deal agencies later on only to get beat back by the political tide) Wilson was really the first president to formulate and implement an economic policy agenda
like i'll accept that most presidents probably couldn't have taken on the depression but that's ironically because they were too ideological, fdr's lack of strong ideology is what makes his response effective

I'll say that I was going to write a bunch of stuff, but got lazy and replaced it with "singular vision," so it's not a particularly accurate turn of phrase. Point is, FDR at least had the willingness to push for a bunch of very new economic policies, in a way that most presidents I don't think could have.[/quote]
i mean yes and no
most of fdr's technical stuff-the AAA, the FSLA, the SSA, the TVA-these are all modernized versions of things that various interest groups had been asking for for years (or scaled-up version of state-level departments USHA) , the majority of the rest of it-the WPA, the CCC, etc-these are simple aggregate demand creators
the things that you might get away with calling truly novel are most of the banking legislation, the homeowners loan corporation, and the NIRA

[Bonggongland]

The issue, in general, isn't the president themselves but rather a systematic weakness that comes with a seperation of powers and first-past-the-post voting. Having three branches of government is good, federalism is good, but in our case those combined with toxic voting methods and incredibly biased and unregulated media, that is constitutionally protected, leaves us with lame-duck presidents even when their own party has a clear majority(see W and Obama).

Trump/Boris/other demagogues are more outliers rather than anything. Simply by replacing FPTP with a form of proportional voting would greatly strengthen work across the aisles and thus strengthen a presidency. Term limits would also be great for ALL government branches as well as a check on outright false speech perpetrated by the media. The presidency itself is fine.

[San Lumen]

No it's Garfield. Endorsed by Frederick Douglass and caused the incredibly corrupt federal appointment process to be reformed. I will die on this hill

garfield would probably have been one of the top-tier presidents if he lived, but he did not (arthur does exceed expectations, but not up to the measure of what garfield would have been)
that said, you always have to be discerning about Gilded Age civil service reform. Some of it is truly well-intentioned belief in good government (Garfield and Arthur), but lots of it is thinly-veiled anti-immigrant diatribe (Greely and Nast)

ofc the actual appointment reforms were...bad, extremely so and didn't really work anyway so that's not a point in his favour at all lmao

That... isn't really relevant, tbh. He wasn't president when that happen so calling him a bad president for things he did before he was president is... dumb. Really dumb. It's like calling Washington the best president purely because he was the leader of the Continental Army.

i don't really think that's a helpful view tbh but letting john tyler into the office via an entirely self-inflicted death is still unforgiveable

What should have happened?

[Tinhampton]

I have some prime examples here, how about President Eisenhower, who in 1969, died of heart failure and who can forget President Jackson who died in 1845 from heart failure and chronic dropsy, and not to mention he had multiple problems including rotting teeth, failing eyesight, internal bleeding in the lungs, etc.

How is either of their deaths relevant? They both died many years after leaving office. I'd tell you most U.S. Presidents have died after leaving office, but it'd probably alarm you.

Because Makko Oko cited a false claim that they died in 1955 and 1837 respectively. (See the top of page two and the second-to-last post of page one.)

[Necroghastia]

garfield would probably have been one of the top-tier presidents if he lived, but he did not (arthur does exceed expectations, but not up to the measure of what garfield would have been)
that said, you always have to be discerning about Gilded Age civil service reform. Some of it is truly well-intentioned belief in good government (Garfield and Arthur), but lots of it is thinly-veiled anti-immigrant diatribe (Greely and Nast)

ofc the actual appointment reforms were...bad, extremely so and didn't really work anyway so that's not a point in his favour at all lmao


i don't really think that's a helpful view tbh but letting john tyler into the office via an entirely self-inflicted death is still unforgiveable

What should have happened?

Should've gave Chuck Guiteau that consulship.