• First scholars' ranking rates Donald Trump as worst president ever
    165 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53143948]Yeah no. It was Truman that solidified America as a power near the end of WWII and past it. FDR was a worthless sack of garbage who probably hurt America more than he helped in the long run[/QUOTE] Why the hatred for FDR specifically when previous dem presidents Cleveland and Wilson were rather racist and didn't help civil rights? edit: actually wikipedia doesn't have Cleveland as especially bad for civil rights except being reluctant to use federal power to enforce voting rights for black people (which was apparently a common northern sentiment at the time) Also had intended this post as a merge but whatever.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53143964]This is hyperbolic.[/QUOTE] Tell that to survivors of the internment camps. Say that he was good with a straight face
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53143982]Tell that to survivors of the internment camps. Say that he was good with a straight face[/QUOTE] He was good, with qualifiers? [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=TheBorealis;53143966]Why the hatred for FDR specifically when previous dem presidents Cleveland and Wilson were rather racist and didn't help civil rights? edit: actually wikipedia doesn't have Cleveland as especially bad for civil rights except being reluctant to use federal power to enforce voting rights for black people (which was apparently a common northern sentiment at the time) Also had intended this post as a merge but whatever.[/QUOTE] Wilson was definitely one of the more racist presidents that we've had.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53143982]Tell that to survivors of the internment camps. Say that he was good with a straight face[/QUOTE] As opposed to Truman who dropped two atomic bombs on Japanese civilians? No presidency is spotless.
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;53144001]As opposed to Truman who dropped two atomic bombs on Japanese civilians? No presidency is spotless.[/QUOTE] Inexcusable. Of course, most Americans tend not to care about the internment camps so this asinine response is to be expected. “Oh but other guy did thing “ is not an excuse. The fuck is wrong with you. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("You need to calm down" - Kiwi))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53143982]Tell that to survivors of the internment camps. Say that he was good with a straight face[/QUOTE] Sure. It'll be a little awkward, but still true. FDR was a net positive - he basically built the American social safety net, did a lot for economic recovery from the Great Depression, and was pretty important to winning WW2. The internment is absolutely a strike against him, but I would much rather have FDR at his worst than Trump at his very best.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;53143992]He was good, with qualifiers? [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] Wilson was definitely one of the more racist presidents that we've had.[/QUOTE] Imagine trying to say that the president that stripped the land and property from thousands of US citizens before sending them in locked railway cars to internment camps in the desert without any access to medical care was a good president. Hell my family wasnt even that lucky. My grandfather and his parents were forced to live in fucking horse stables for a couple of months. I had family that died in the internment camps because they were denied medical care. FDR is probably one of the worst presidents in US history. [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=gman003-main;53144009]Sure. It'll be a little awkward, but still true. FDR was a net positive - he basically built the American social safety net, did a lot for economic recovery from the Great Depression, and was pretty important to winning WW2. The internment is absolutely a strike against him, but I would much rather have FDR at his worst than Trump at his very best.[/QUOTE] FDR at his worst illegally imprisoned thousands of US citizens after stripping them of all their property. He did this out of nothing but pure racism. To say youd rather have FDR at his worst just shows how ignorant you are of what FDR did. [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] Like do any of you actually know anything about the internment camps?
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53143982]Tell that to survivors of the internment camps. Say that he was good with a straight face[/QUOTE] I know full well about that instance of racism and xenophobia. I'm not forgiving him of it, it was a product of the time, of being at war, and yes, when we look back on it, it was stupid. Thank god hindsight is so much easier to make judgments with.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53144024]I know full well about that instance of racism and xenophobia. I'm not forgiving him of it, it was a product of the time, of being at war, and yes, when we look back on it, it was stupid. Thank god hindsight is so much easier to make judgments with.[/QUOTE] It’s not fucking hindsight to say that interning your own citizens based on their race is a bad thing. Holy shit I cannot believe you’re trying to downplay that. War or not there is no fucking excuse. You’re a disgusting person if you think that, holy goddamn
[QUOTE=Eva-1337;53143869]Trump's the best! Nobody is best at being the worse than him! I'm honestly interested to see how he reacts. You know his ego won't keep him quiet on this.[/QUOTE] Condemning the list as fake, then releasing "the unbiased totally not fake greatest President "list where he is the highest rated in everything. And an announcement to change Mount Rushmore by removing "those other guys" and carving his head wearing various hats, as well as renaming it to Trump Mountain. All written in crayon with pointless doodles all around.
[QUOTE=Amber902;53144010]Like do any of you actually know anything about the internment camps?[/QUOTE] Yes. I'm reasonably confident everyone in this thread knows about the internment camps and knows that bad they were. I think the general point is that we think he was a good president in spite of this particularly nasty blemish.
[QUOTE=Amber902;53144010] FDR at his worst illegally imprisoned thousands of US citizens after stripping them of all their property. He did this out of nothing but pure racism. To say youd rather have FDR at his worst just shows how ignorant you are of what FDR did. [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] Like do any of you actually know anything about the internment camps?[/QUOTE] Yes, they were absolutely terrible. They weren't auschwitz or Dakow but they were fucking terrible, and yes, it was a racist decision. I'm not forgiving him of those things, or the personal oddities that define him, but his presidential terms were influential in huge ways. There shouldn't be any effort to downplay the racism that he displayed. But that racism doesn't change the actual acheivments he made beyond those. I know, it hurts that racist people can be effective at things. it'd be much easier if all racists were massively incompetent messes of human beings(Roosevelt was at least a mess of a human being)
[QUOTE=Lambeth;53144035]Yes. I'm reasonably confident everyone in this thread knows about the internment camps and knows that bad they were. I think the general point is that we think he was a good president in spite of this particularly nasty blemish.[/QUOTE] Okay so how about all the programs that people loved that were really just extended by Truman and Eisenhower. How about how he didn’t actually see us “through wwii” but instead had competent commanders that knew what they were doing. He died before the war ended. America’s position and diplomatic ties post war were entirely the doings of Truman. Please stop acting like it’s just a blemish please.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144033]It’s not fucking hindsight to say that interning your own citizens based on their race is a bad thing. Holy shit I cannot believe you’re trying to downplay that. War or not there is no fucking excuse. You’re a disgusting person if you think that, holy goddamn[/QUOTE] Okay. I don't have anything to say to this because this is one step short of flaming.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53144042]Okay. I don't have anything to say to this because this is one step short of flaming.[/QUOTE] No I’m sure you do have something to say to it. Try and explain to me that it’s only bad in hindsight and that there was somehow a way to justify it. That’s what you’ve set up man, so explain your position.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144041]Okay so how about all the programs that people loved that were really just extended by Truman and Eisenhower. How about how he didn’t actually see us “through wwii” but instead had competent commanders that knew what they were doing. He died before the war ended. America’s position and diplomatic ties post war were entirely the doings of Truman. Please stop acting like it’s just a blemish please.[/QUOTE] Alright, please get livid, absolutely rage filled at a fellow super liberal like Lambeth over this, and see how effective you are at communicating that point with people who normally agree with you on subjects, let alone people who actually oppose you.
[QUOTE=Duck M.;53143800]Obama's legacy is going to be super fascinating to observe going forward. He dealt with a lot of difficult situations, has a pretty solid list of achievements under his belt, and is in the top 5 most charismatic human beings ever imo. I'll always wonder what he could and would have done with his power if there wasn't so much gridlock and obstructionist GOP sludge bogging down his administration. [/QUOTE] People treat Obama like the second coming of Christ when Obama never did a whole lot in his time, Mediocrity can best sum up his Presidency imo. Blaming others for his inactions doesn't really speak highly of him when you are supposed to be a countries leader. The real reason many of his supporters praise him is because he is black, which is just as racist as voting for someone because they are white. Colour coding your nations leaders does no favours in the end. Bill Clinton was a better Democrat President because he had the power, wielded it effectively and got things done. Obama just blundered around lecturing people while leaders like Putin and Aung San Suu Kyi danced around him. He managed to screw up in Libya, Syria and Iraq and failed to put the screws on gun control. Bill Clinton by comparison managed to get Pakistan-India to back off, used military might to get China to see reason, stopped the Serbs from committing more atrocities with NATO and got assault weapons banned. As far as I can see his most memorable actions include getting Osama bin laden [I would expect any American president to get him however], the affordable health care act and more LGBT rights. I am sure there is more to it than that but please enlighten me.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53144049]Alright, please get livid, absolutely rage filled at a fellow super liberal like Lambeth over this, and see how effective you are at communicating that point with people who normally agree with you on subjects, let alone people who actually oppose you.[/QUOTE] What does this have to do with anything that I’ve said, other than prove my point that Americans would like to whitewash some of the worst treatment of its own citizens that was essentially ignored for nearly half a century.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144047]No I’m sure you do have something to say to it. Try and explain to me that it’s only bad in hindsight and that there was somehow a way to justify it. That’s what you’ve set up man, so explain your position.[/QUOTE] You've already said "It doesn't matter that it was war" so you've invalidated anything that anyone could use to argue that point from before the argument even began because you personally have set the criteria as that, and you won't let someone else define those limits because if it's not a limit you agree with then "You’re a disgusting person".
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53144058]You've already said "It doesn't matter that it was war" so you've invalidated anything that anyone could use to argue that point from before the argument even began because you personally have set the criteria as that, and you won't let someone else define those limits because if it's not a limit you agree with then "You’re a disgusting person".[/QUOTE] I’ve limited nothing. If you can’t find a valid reason, then quit acting like there was one.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144057]What does this have to do with anything that I’ve said, other than prove my point that Americans would like to whitewash some of the worst treatment of its own citizens that was essentially ignored for nearly half a century.[/QUOTE] I don't think it was ignored if people like Lambeth have been educated on it and know how bad it was I think how people approach these conversations, any conversation, is important. No one is trying to make it seem less bad. Tell me, please, where I said "it wasn't as bad", or anything to that effect? No, I said it was terrible. But you don't read that, see that, or acknowledge that and instead are displaying an emotional disgust with your "opposition".
[QUOTE=Lambeth;53144035]Yes. I'm reasonably confident everyone in this thread knows about the internment camps and knows that bad they were. I think the general point is that we think he was a good president in spite of this particularly nasty blemish.[/QUOTE] Particularly bad blemish????? Stripping the rights of thousands of born fucking US citizens before imprisoning them in the middle of the desert is more them a blemish. Forcing citizens to renounce their culture and sending those that dont comply to maximum security camps is more then a "nasty blemish". Forcing women and children to live behind barbed wire and machine gun nests and occassionally gunning a few of them down for getting too close to the wire is not some tiny blemish. The internment wasnt a blemish. It was a stain. Not just on FDRs presidency, but for the entirety of the US. The fact that you try to downplay it as not severe is abhorrent. People fucking died. I lost a great aunt because they refused medical care to a sick infant.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144041]Okay so how about all the programs that people loved that were really just extended by Truman and Eisenhower. How about how he didn’t actually see us “through wwii” but instead had competent commanders that knew what they were doing. He died before the war ended. America’s position and diplomatic ties post war were entirely the doings of Truman. Please stop acting like it’s just a blemish please.[/QUOTE] I don't understand why you hold up truman up in so much higher regard when he nuked the hell out of japan. For some reason you're willing to accept that Truman was a complicated imperfect man but not so with FDR.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144063]I’ve limited nothing. If you can’t find a valid reason, then quit acting like there was one.[/QUOTE] You can say "war isn't a reason", but it really is. You and I haven't lived through anything remotely similar, so frankly neither of us can really know the context of these decisions as they were in the moment. They were at war, paranoia and fear was rife in everyone. People were afraid of each other, of "the other" and much, much more. The world was in turmoil in a pretty significant way at that time and hope was low. No, I don't think it's an excuse or a reason no matter how much you might like to read it that way.
[QUOTE=Amber902;53144066]Particularly bad blemish????? Stripping the rights of thousands of born fucking US citizens before imprisoning them in the middle of the desert is more them a blemish. Forcing citizens to renounce their culture and sending those that dont comply to maximum security camps is more then a "nasty blemish". Forcing women and children to live behind barbed wire and machine gun nests and occassionally gunning a few of them down for getting too close to the wire is not some tiny blemish. The internment wasnt a blemish. It was a stain. Not just on FDRs presidency, but for the entirety of the US. The fact that you try to downplay it as not severe is abhorrent. People fucking died. I lost a great aunt because they refused medical care to a sick infant.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry that your great aunt died! I'm not trying to downplay anything! [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144075]The nuclear attacks are a difficult issue that can still be debated. I for one actually feel that the bombings were horrendous and only effective due to their sheer brutality. However let us not forget of the firebombing of Tokyo which killed nearly as many people as the atomic bombs. Which was done while FDR was still in office. [/QUOTE] This is true. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are still dealing with the aftereffects of the nuclear bombs to this day however. Cancer rates are still through the roof in those regions.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;53144067]I don't understand why you hold up truman up in so much higher regard when he nuked the hell out of japan. For some reason you're willing to accept that Truman was a complicated imperfect man but not so with FDR.[/QUOTE] The nuclear attacks are a difficult issue that can still be debated. I for one actually feel that the bombings were horrendous and only effective due to their sheer brutality. However let us not forget of the firebombing of Tokyo which killed nearly as many people as the atomic bombs. Which was done while FDR was still in office. [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53144070]You can say "war isn't a reason", but it really is. [/QUOTE] So you’re saying that it was justified. Fantastic. Oh of course you can turn around and say “but of course there is no excuse! We just don’t know how bad it was back then! We aren’t experienced in that!”. Blah blah blah. At the end of the day, you’re trying to make them out as okay and not that bad guys!!! Insulting, to say the least.
[QUOTE=Amber902;53144066]Particularly bad blemish????? Stripping the rights of thousands of born fucking US citizens before imprisoning them in the middle of the desert is more them a blemish. Forcing citizens to renounce their culture and sending those that dont comply to maximum security camps is more then a "nasty blemish". Forcing women and children to live behind barbed wire and machine gun nests and occassionally gunning a few of them down for getting too close to the wire is not some tiny blemish. The internment wasnt a blemish. It was a stain. Not just on FDRs presidency, but for the entirety of the US. The fact that you try to downplay it as not severe is abhorrent. People fucking died. I lost a great aunt because they refused medical care to a sick infant.[/QUOTE] It was a terrible time and I'm not trying to downplay it and I genuinely think it was terrible it was done. But that horrible shit having been done doesn't change the good that was also done. It makes it tainted for sure and I wouldn't personally say FDR is the best president for Mt Rushmoore, but he also helped keep the country going with the fireside chats and a variety of other elements of his personality and policy. Yes, he was a bad person. I don't think he was the worst president by any stretch though. Sorry if that's offensive but I don't think it is. [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144075]The nuclear attacks are a difficult issue that can still be debated. I for one actually feel that the bombings were horrendous and only effective due to their sheer brutality. However let us not forget of the firebombing of Tokyo which killed nearly as many people as the atomic bombs. Which was done while FDR was still in office. [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] So you’re saying that it was justified. Fantastic.[/QUOTE] Yes, thats [B]exactly[/B] what I'm saying and there's no other way to read that. Yep. [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Zillamaster55;53144075]The nuclear attacks are a difficult issue that can still be debated. I for one actually feel that the bombings were horrendous and only effective due to their sheer brutality. However let us not forget of the firebombing of Tokyo which killed nearly as many people as the atomic bombs. Which was done while FDR was still in office.[/QUOTE] So if Truman was okay with the Firebombings, what would you say about that?
[QUOTE=Lambeth;53144067]I don't understand why you hold up truman up in so much higher regard when he nuked the hell out of japan. For some reason you're willing to accept that Truman was a complicated imperfect man but not so with FDR.[/QUOTE] The nukes had an actual purpose and arguably saved more lives then they extinguished. The internment has no justification whatsoever. The fact that youre trying to compare them implies that you think the internment had some military justification.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53144080] So if Truman was okay with the Firebombings, what would you say about that?[/QUOTE] I’d say that it was a hideous act of massed murder that achieved nothing. Much like how I view the atomic bombs, which were just so horrendous that it forced Japan to surrender. It gets no praise from me.
[QUOTE=Amber902;53144085]The nukes had an actual purpose and arguably saved more lives then they extinguished. The internment has no justification whatsoever. The fact that youre trying to compare them implies that you think the internment had some military justification.[/QUOTE] Read whatever you want into my posts, I'm trying to be as honest and direct as I can.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.