I want to have an actual numerical value on who people here think really was the worst President in U.S. history (i.e. how many people really think Bush is the worst). As for me, I think Buchanan's the worst, but I'm sure people will have some interesting responses. If enough people pick a person that I didn't list, I might add them to the poll.
Poll
Worst President Ever?
| James Buchanan | 6% | 6% - 14 | ||||
| Andrew Johnson | 2% | 2% - 6 | ||||
| Ulysses Grant | 3% | 3% - 8 | ||||
| Herbert Hoover | 3% | 3% - 8 | ||||
| Warren Harding | 2% | 2% - 6 | ||||
| Bill Clinton | 14% | 14% - 29 | ||||
| George W. Bush | 57% | 57% - 118 | ||||
| Other (explain) | 8% | 8% - 17 | ||||
| Total: 206 | ||||||
Bush, He wants america do have dirty air, and he sends and sens troops to Iraq to get them killed.
Definately not Clinton or Bush, it is far too early to make any call on that. I would've put Franklin Pierce somewhere on that list, too; possibly instead of Grant or Harding.
As the convinceme.net debaters so eloquently put it.Axon wrote:
Bush, He wants america do have dirty air, and he sends and sens troops to Iraq to get them killed.
You lack historical context to say this
http://www.convinceme.net/viewDebate.php?dib=58
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Bush Sr.
Definitely not Bush or Clinton. They're average at best and worst.
Hoover was average too.
Grant was awful but I'd place him as below average. His administration was known for corruption but not making things that much worse.
Buchanan and Johnson are my choices. Buchanan's inaction basically caused the Civil War. Johnson's bungling of Reconstruction set back America for many years. Of course, compared to Lincoln, whose presidency Buchanan and Johnson's bookends, it would be difficult to shine. Lincoln was THE best president the US ever had, and one of the truly great leaders in world history.
Hoover was average too.
Grant was awful but I'd place him as below average. His administration was known for corruption but not making things that much worse.
Buchanan and Johnson are my choices. Buchanan's inaction basically caused the Civil War. Johnson's bungling of Reconstruction set back America for many years. Of course, compared to Lincoln, whose presidency Buchanan and Johnson's bookends, it would be difficult to shine. Lincoln was THE best president the US ever had, and one of the truly great leaders in world history.
I was thinking about putting the other unknown presidents leading up to the Civil War, but I didn't want to dwell on that too much.DesertFox423 wrote:
Definately not Clinton or Bush, it is far too early to make any call on that. I would've put Franklin Pierce somewhere on that list, too; possibly instead of Grant or Harding.
Agreed Lincoln was the best in my opinion.KillerKane0 wrote:
Definitely not Bush or Clinton. They're average at best and worst.
Hoover was average too.
Grant was awful but I'd place him as below average. His administration was known for corruption but not making things that much worse.
Buchanan and Johnson are my choices. Buchanan's inaction basically caused the Civil War. Johnson's bungling of Reconstruction set back America for many years. Of course, compared to Lincoln, whose presidency Buchanan and Johnson's bookends, it would be difficult to shine. Lincoln was THE best president the US ever had, and one of the truly great leaders in world history.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Bush ...definitely one of the least intelligent Presidents America have had, not a good advertisement for American intelligence.
A good representation of lack of intelligence would be judging over 300 million people based on one man.Braddock wrote:
Bush ...definitely one of the least intelligent Presidents America have had, not a good advertisement for American intelligence.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Hoover's lack of forsight caused the great depression.
william henry harrison.
i hate that fucker....reason? indians......well in that case thomas jefferson was a fucking asshat also.
i hate that fucker....reason? indians......well in that case thomas jefferson was a fucking asshat also.
One man (and an army of campaigners dedicated to the Bush dynasty) who convinced a large proportion of those 300 million to vote for him - twice.Kmarion wrote:
A good representation of lack of intelligence would be judging over 300 million people based on one man.Braddock wrote:
Bush ...definitely one of the least intelligent Presidents America have had, not a good advertisement for American intelligence.
Although I'm sure voter apathy and die hard Republicanism played as much a part as the man himself.
I'm kind of suprised not to see Nixon as an option.
Damn, I can't believe I forgot Nixon. I knew I was forgetting somebody.Bertster7 wrote:
One man (and an army of campaigners dedicated to the Bush dynasty) who convinced a large proportion of those 300 million to vote for him - twice.Kmarion wrote:
A good representation of lack of intelligence would be judging over 300 million people based on one man.Braddock wrote:
Bush ...definitely one of the least intelligent Presidents America have had, not a good advertisement for American intelligence.
Although I'm sure voter apathy and die hard Republicanism played as much a part as the man himself.
I'm kind of suprised not to see Nixon as an option.
How about the worst leaders in other countries. I'll start!
Worst Canadian prime ministers:
The worst = Pierre E. Trudeau (1968-79, 80-84), the heartless tyrant who invaded Quebec in 1970 and robbed Alberta in the early 80s
.
Second worst = Jean Chretien (1993-2004), nearly 12 years in office with nothing to show for it except extreme corruption.
Worst Canadian prime ministers:
The worst = Pierre E. Trudeau (1968-79, 80-84), the heartless tyrant who invaded Quebec in 1970 and robbed Alberta in the early 80s
.
Second worst = Jean Chretien (1993-2004), nearly 12 years in office with nothing to show for it except extreme corruption.
What is it with Americans? they get so defensive so quickly... Did I say that 300 million Americans were as dumb as Bush? No ...I said he wasn't a good advertisement for American intelligence. What kind of message does it send out when you elect a man who is quite obviously not a great intellectual power ...to put it mildly? He is your leader, your alpha male representative to the rest of the world. I don't doubt that he has an army of advisers and aides, obviously; I mean the man spent 10mins reading My Pet Goat while the nation was experiencing the worst attack since Pearl Harbor, he couldn't really be running the whole show. I'm not saying all Americans are as stupid as him (heaven forbid) but he is the most prominent American on the world stage and as such will be prominent in many peoples minds when making assumptions about the American nation and its citizens, even though those assumptions will not be fully informed. It's about perception, if aliens landed and communicated with Bush what would they presume about the American people?Kmarion wrote:
A good representation of lack of intelligence would be judging over 300 million people based on one man.Braddock wrote:
Bush ...definitely one of the least intelligent Presidents America have had, not a good advertisement for American intelligence.
(insert retaliatory comment here... ).
I'm not claiming that Bush is some kind of genius, but he isn't the total dumbass that people make him out to be. He's headstrong and stubborn, but he's smarter than he lets off. It's especially pointless to quibble about how long he read to the kids on 9/11. What else would you have him do in front of a bunch of kids, have him scream "OH MY GOD!" repeatedly?Braddock wrote:
What is it with Americans? they get so defensive so quickly... Did I say that 300 million Americans were as dumb as Bush? No ...I said he wasn't a good advertisement for American intelligence. What kind of message does it send out when you elect a man who is quite obviously not a great intellectual power ...to put it mildly? He is your leader, your alpha male representative to the rest of the world. I don't doubt that he has an army of advisers and aides, obviously; I mean the man spent 10mins reading My Pet Goat while the nation was experiencing the worst attack since Pearl Harbor, he couldn't really be running the whole show. I'm not saying all Americans are as stupid as him (heaven forbid) but he is the most prominent American on the world stage and as such will be prominent in many peoples minds when making assumptions about the American nation and its citizens, even though those assumptions will not be fully informed. It's about perception, if aliens landed and communicated with Bush what would they presume about the American people?Kmarion wrote:
A good representation of lack of intelligence would be judging over 300 million people based on one man.Braddock wrote:
Bush ...definitely one of the least intelligent Presidents America have had, not a good advertisement for American intelligence.
(insert retaliatory comment here... ).
I wish he had, that would've been pretty surreal!. But seriously could he not have put the book down and gone and down something about it while the shit was hitting the fan. I don't think Americans 'quibble' enough about the Bush administration's poor handling of the events leading up to and including 9/11.UGADawgs wrote:
What else would you have him do in front of a bunch of kids, have him scream "OH MY GOD!" repeatedly?
If you don't say Harding then you shouldn't be allowed to vote either in this poll or any real ones. You should be spending time reading up on US history.
Not sure how you can include the current President, or the last one for that matter since history has not had time to judge his actions.
Interesting....KillerKane0 wrote:
How about the worst leaders in other countries. I'll start!
Worst Canadian prime ministers:
The worst = Pierre E. Trudeau (1968-79, 80-84), the heartless tyrant who invaded Quebec in 1970 and robbed Alberta in the early 80s
.
Second worst = Jean Chretien (1993-2004), nearly 12 years in office with nothing to show for it except extreme corruption.
For England I'd say the worst leaders were Chamberlin (for letting WWII happen, what a prick) and (though I hate to say it because he was a fucking legend) Richard I - he was a really useless leader, constantly at war far away for no real purpose draining the economy of the country, sounds a bit like Bush doesn't he.
I guess I'm bringing a non American perspective to this poll. Loads of people the world over used to love America but Bush has done more than any other President to turn the outside world against the US, that's the main reason i perceive him to be one of the worst. Maybe many of you are happy with Bush on a domestic level and that's fine.
Bush on 9/11 gets a bad rap, but in reality no one had any idea of what was going on. Not Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, Cheney, or anyone at the highest level. I'd say the only people to respond well to the crisis were Mayor Giuliani, the emergency workers of the NY-NJ area who responded well to the WTC, and the Metro DC area who responded to the Pentagon, and the passengers of United Flight 93, who knew the odds were negligible but decided to risk it all to save their lives.
The whole thing was over in two hours. It is very difficult to keep a clear head when things are moving as fast as that. Lincoln had between SIX MONTHS (November 1860 and April 1861) to decide how to respond to the secession crisis, and not even he had a firm grasp of what was going on.
At worst, President Bush responded as we all did - with shock and horror. To accuse him of negligence is ridiculous - as Michael Moore and other nutcases are doing. heck, most of those people think Bush was behind 9/11. Fools. I think history will be kinder to Bush than his critics have been - but then they have to be.
The whole thing was over in two hours. It is very difficult to keep a clear head when things are moving as fast as that. Lincoln had between SIX MONTHS (November 1860 and April 1861) to decide how to respond to the secession crisis, and not even he had a firm grasp of what was going on.
At worst, President Bush responded as we all did - with shock and horror. To accuse him of negligence is ridiculous - as Michael Moore and other nutcases are doing. heck, most of those people think Bush was behind 9/11. Fools. I think history will be kinder to Bush than his critics have been - but then they have to be.
Did Bush not choose to ignore Intelligence reports on the plotting of Bin Laden right up to 9/11? At what point during his shock and horror did he decide to fly all of Bin Laden's relations out of the country with incredible speed and efficiency while the rest of America were grounded until further notice? If my Taoiseach acted like that in a similar attack on Ireland I'd be demanding answers.KillerKane0 wrote:
Bush on 9/11 gets a bad rap, but in reality no one had any idea of what was going on. Not Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, Cheney, or anyone at the highest level. I'd say the only people to respond well to the crisis were Mayor Giuliani, the emergency workers of the NY-NJ area who responded well to the WTC, and the Metro DC area who responded to the Pentagon, and the passengers of United Flight 93, who knew the odds were negligible but decided to risk it all to save their lives.
Ronald Reagan.
Andrew Jackson.
FDR.
edit: "worst" is such a subjective term. Worst in what way?
Andrew Jackson slaughtered and despised my ancestors (Native-Americans)
FDR put a piece of gum in a water leak ("overcoming" the Great Depression)
Ronald Reagan increased the national debt to unforeseen heights (much like FDR) and helped pave the way for the current military/industrial complex while at the same time supporting terrorists.
Andrew Jackson.
FDR.
edit: "worst" is such a subjective term. Worst in what way?
Andrew Jackson slaughtered and despised my ancestors (Native-Americans)
FDR put a piece of gum in a water leak ("overcoming" the Great Depression)
Ronald Reagan increased the national debt to unforeseen heights (much like FDR) and helped pave the way for the current military/industrial complex while at the same time supporting terrorists.
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-02-21 16:41:58)