i would need a time machine to say for certain. andrew jackson is still my nominee for the post. ragun, nixxon, dubya, and lets pray to god(s) not, trump, are all in the running, even old lonsome george there are problems with. the only thing i would say against obama, either of the clintons, carter, or jfk, is that none of them had a magic god wand to change the situations they inherited taking office. i mean every president has done one or more really bad dumb things that i find morally reprehensible, but some have generally tried to represent the will of the people, and some have more notoriously then others, not.
Seems to me that when the legacy of individual is dependant on the actions of both party and senate, then judgement on such should be a degree more considered
The president's job is to represent the will of the people and enforce the rule of law which isn't easy at times because the two conflict. In that regard, Andrew Jackson would be my pick for being another demagogue like Trump who made words like nepotism and genocide household words. I wish I could say it was Reagan but, for the most part, he stuck with the letter of the law and was just plain nasty which, unfortunately, represents the American people.
along about their third year in office, every one of them is the worst. and then there are those who's only intention in running for office was to screw everything up, or take vengence on imagined slights. we don't get a lot of those, but when we do, we've sure got one now. its hard to compare things from before you were born. you only have other people's word for it, and historians are notoriously unreliable. ask anyone older then yourself, and nine times out of ten, the world historians describe only rarely and only vaguely resembles one they lived in. the only safe assumption is that there are always things each of us don't know. we've got a very naughty boy at the reins of power right now. it can happen in any system. this time it happened in ours. we've had other bad apples from time to time. the worst, until now, were all likely before my time. being before my time, i have only the hear say of historians. i can name the bad apples in the white-house in my lifetime. ragun was a zombie and nixxon notorious. each did some good and lots more bad. and the good often as not for bad reasons. what we have now may be in a more notorious league, then any in america's history. the league of some of the worst naughty boys and girls in the history of the human species.
When it's all said and done, Donald Trump will go down in history as our worst president. No other president attacked our fundamental principles and institutions for personal gains and protection.
If this North Korea meeting goes ahead, that will immediately elevate him in to your top 20 US presidents And he doesnt even need to do anything, or really even resolve anything, just needs a photo of him sitting down with Kim Jong Un to go down in history as one of your best peace brokers Oh, yeah, BTW, US unemployment rate is at an 18 year low 18 months after The Trumpmeister was sworn in
Not one can surpass the fat fucking orange thing in the white house. And no, this is NOT an ambien rant... it was carefully considered and thought about. I stand by it.
Little child you must show the way To a better day for all the young 'Cause you were born for all the world to see That we all can live with love and peace No more presidents and all the wars will end One united world under God
Negotiating will NK is an act of desperation, and disgraces the presidency. There’s a reason American presidents don't meet with brutal tyrants like Un. It raises the tyrants stature and dimishes ours.
unless all history lies completely, there were worse before i was born, then even raygun, nixxon, or chump. (jackson and tyler as examples) (trump is really trying though, to dismantle the judiciary, and replace congress with his puppets, to dismantle every constitutional guarantee along with the constitution itself. unless he can somehow get away with votes just not being counted at all, he's not likely to completely remove the influence of congress, nor entirely the constitutional separation of powers) (that doesn't mean he isn't a bigger threat then any potential foreign invader, or the lack of need to worry about him. he IS out to see how much he can destroy, along with how much he can cushion himself in the process.)
Just the hipforums way brother. Besides if you take the time to investigate @themnax long & storied history on this site you'll find him to be exceptionally thoughtful & fairly well detailed.