Is Trump really the worst US president ever?

Page 3 of 4 [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

23 Feb 2018, 6:40 pm

Aniihya wrote:
In my opinion it should be Bush Jr. was the worst followed by Trump then Obama. Obama is often unjustly praised. Obamacare for example penalized the poor if they could afford healthcare even with subsidization and also since Obama the left got lefter, the right got righter and race relations is worse than before because instead of reconciliation it turned more into a war of the races.


I agree about Bush. People forget how bad that imbecile was. Smiling like a Cheshire cat about killing people. Obama was just his third and fourth term.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

23 Feb 2018, 7:37 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I hardly think Lyndon Johnson should be on that list, as he is responsible for so much civil rights legislation. But one guy who should be at the top of the list was Andrew Johnson, Lincoln's successor. Andrew Johnson had tried to ruin Reconstruction for purely racist reasons, and was the first President ot be impeached (seems you can't remove someone from office who's an alcoholic incompetent, after all). Grant ended up having to clean up much of his mess.
But as far as Trump is concerned - he has not yet completed his term, and so can't be judged just yet. But if he was in fact guilty of getting Russian help to reach the White House, he'll certainly be up there as on of the very worst.


You have a point about Andrew Johnson, though I don't take back what I said about Lyndon.

I try to maintain an international outlook. Thus, I judge world leaders based on what they do for the whole world, not just their own citizens.

Yes. Lyndon Johnson did pass some civil rights legislation. He also allowed this to happen.



The big picture is what matters.


While I had heard of birth defects associated with Agent Orange, this is actually the first time that I've seen the horrific outcome. Yes, Lyndon Johnson bears responsibility, but unlike the likes of Andrew Johnson or Andrew Jackson, he hardly intended such horrible things to come out of his policies.


How do you know he didn't mean it? He would have known the consequences anyway. I'm sure the civil rights stuff would have happened if JFK had lived anyway.
He did a complete 180 in the Middle East which started pretty much in 1967.
I'd also imagine the destruction in Cambodia could have led to Pol Pot.


Johnson had no idea what those chemicals would do in the long term. Nobody did back then.
Kennedy would have tried to push through Civil Rights, but he probably didn't have the congressional know-how, and just mean spiritedness to threaten and bully that Johnson had. That is in fact an assessment of modern historians.


Then that is almost worse. Using chemical weapons on civilians without knowing what horrors lay ahead. The civil rights stuff was just a token gesture for himself. Given his murderous attitude to non whites in South East Asia and in the Middle East we know it had nothing to do with him caring about rights for non white people, so we can dismiss that. Also, talk about treason regarding Trump. Johnson let a foreign country bomb a US ship for over two hours. What a traitor.


As I already said: No, as nobody knew there would be long term effects. Now if he used Agent Orange knowing it would cause birth defects, that would make it worse.
Johnson cared about the rights of Americans, regardless of color. The North Vietnamese were are enemies at the time, so he wasn't going to handle them with kid gloves, as harsh as that might sound.
As for Johnson being a traitor - - you're a Limey, so you probably think George Washington was a traitor.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Piobaire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,347
Location: Smackass Gap, NC

24 Feb 2018, 10:08 am

Yes, beyond any reasonable doubt.



JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

24 Feb 2018, 12:06 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I hardly think Lyndon Johnson should be on that list, as he is responsible for so much civil rights legislation. But one guy who should be at the top of the list was Andrew Johnson, Lincoln's successor. Andrew Johnson had tried to ruin Reconstruction for purely racist reasons, and was the first President ot be impeached (seems you can't remove someone from office who's an alcoholic incompetent, after all). Grant ended up having to clean up much of his mess.
But as far as Trump is concerned - he has not yet completed his term, and so can't be judged just yet. But if he was in fact guilty of getting Russian help to reach the White House, he'll certainly be up there as on of the very worst.


You have a point about Andrew Johnson, though I don't take back what I said about Lyndon.

I try to maintain an international outlook. Thus, I judge world leaders based on what they do for the whole world, not just their own citizens.

Yes. Lyndon Johnson did pass some civil rights legislation. He also allowed this to happen.



The big picture is what matters.


While I had heard of birth defects associated with Agent Orange, this is actually the first time that I've seen the horrific outcome. Yes, Lyndon Johnson bears responsibility, but unlike the likes of Andrew Johnson or Andrew Jackson, he hardly intended such horrible things to come out of his policies.


How do you know he didn't mean it? He would have known the consequences anyway. I'm sure the civil rights stuff would have happened if JFK had lived anyway.
He did a complete 180 in the Middle East which started pretty much in 1967.
I'd also imagine the destruction in Cambodia could have led to Pol Pot.


Johnson had no idea what those chemicals would do in the long term. Nobody did back then.
Kennedy would have tried to push through Civil Rights, but he probably didn't have the congressional know-how, and just mean spiritedness to threaten and bully that Johnson had. That is in fact an assessment of modern historians.


Then that is almost worse. Using chemical weapons on civilians without knowing what horrors lay ahead. The civil rights stuff was just a token gesture for himself. Given his murderous attitude to non whites in South East Asia and in the Middle East we know it had nothing to do with him caring about rights for non white people, so we can dismiss that. Also, talk about treason regarding Trump. Johnson let a foreign country bomb a US ship for over two hours. What a traitor.


As I already said: No, as nobody knew there would be long term effects. Now if he used Agent Orange knowing it would cause birth defects, that would make it worse.
Johnson cared about the rights of Americans, regardless of color. The North Vietnamese were are enemies at the time, so he wasn't going to handle them with kid gloves, as harsh as that might sound.
As for Johnson being a traitor - - you're a Limey, so you probably think George Washington was a traitor.


They must have had idea. Completely reckless and evil. He knew the wildlife, animals and humans it would kill. Then there was the false flag in the Gulf of Tonkin. Using a fake attack to kill more people. He bombed the South Vietnamese with chemical weapons too. That doesn't sound harsh, it sounds sadistic. The US was the enemy and the foreign invader as usual.
He allowed a US ship to be bombed for over two hours and intended for it to be sunk with all Americans to die. The USS Liberty. So no, he didn't care about the rights of all Americans. A few token cookies means nothing when you are killing masses of non white people around the globe. You seem to think that a President allegedly calling a country a "sh*t hole" is worse than carpet bombing a country with chemical weapons and killing 2 million people there. You think not letting refugees in is worse than blowing up a country and creating millions of refugees.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

24 Feb 2018, 4:52 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
DarthMetaKnight wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I hardly think Lyndon Johnson should be on that list, as he is responsible for so much civil rights legislation. But one guy who should be at the top of the list was Andrew Johnson, Lincoln's successor. Andrew Johnson had tried to ruin Reconstruction for purely racist reasons, and was the first President ot be impeached (seems you can't remove someone from office who's an alcoholic incompetent, after all). Grant ended up having to clean up much of his mess.
But as far as Trump is concerned - he has not yet completed his term, and so can't be judged just yet. But if he was in fact guilty of getting Russian help to reach the White House, he'll certainly be up there as on of the very worst.


You have a point about Andrew Johnson, though I don't take back what I said about Lyndon.

I try to maintain an international outlook. Thus, I judge world leaders based on what they do for the whole world, not just their own citizens.

Yes. Lyndon Johnson did pass some civil rights legislation. He also allowed this to happen.



The big picture is what matters.


While I had heard of birth defects associated with Agent Orange, this is actually the first time that I've seen the horrific outcome. Yes, Lyndon Johnson bears responsibility, but unlike the likes of Andrew Johnson or Andrew Jackson, he hardly intended such horrible things to come out of his policies.


How do you know he didn't mean it? He would have known the consequences anyway. I'm sure the civil rights stuff would have happened if JFK had lived anyway.
He did a complete 180 in the Middle East which started pretty much in 1967.
I'd also imagine the destruction in Cambodia could have led to Pol Pot.


Johnson had no idea what those chemicals would do in the long term. Nobody did back then.
Kennedy would have tried to push through Civil Rights, but he probably didn't have the congressional know-how, and just mean spiritedness to threaten and bully that Johnson had. That is in fact an assessment of modern historians.


Then that is almost worse. Using chemical weapons on civilians without knowing what horrors lay ahead. The civil rights stuff was just a token gesture for himself. Given his murderous attitude to non whites in South East Asia and in the Middle East we know it had nothing to do with him caring about rights for non white people, so we can dismiss that. Also, talk about treason regarding Trump. Johnson let a foreign country bomb a US ship for over two hours. What a traitor.


As I already said: No, as nobody knew there would be long term effects. Now if he used Agent Orange knowing it would cause birth defects, that would make it worse.
Johnson cared about the rights of Americans, regardless of color. The North Vietnamese were are enemies at the time, so he wasn't going to handle them with kid gloves, as harsh as that might sound.
As for Johnson being a traitor - - you're a Limey, so you probably think George Washington was a traitor.


They must have had idea. Completely reckless and evil. He knew the wildlife, animals and humans it would kill. Then there was the false flag in the Gulf of Tonkin. Using a fake attack to kill more people. He bombed the South Vietnamese with chemical weapons too. That doesn't sound harsh, it sounds sadistic. The US was the enemy and the foreign invader as usual.
He allowed a US ship to be bombed for over two hours and intended for it to be sunk with all Americans to die. The USS Liberty. So no, he didn't care about the rights of all Americans. A few token cookies means nothing when you are killing masses of non white people around the globe. You seem to think that a President allegedly calling a country a "sh*t hole" is worse than carpet bombing a country with chemical weapons and killing 2 million people there. You think not letting refugees in is worse than blowing up a country and creating millions of refugees.


The purpose of Agent Orange was to defoliate jungles so the enemy couldn't hide. Prior to that, it had been used here in the United States as a weed killer. There was zero proof that it was known the stuff could have long lasting effects.
The attack on the Liberty was a tragedy, but Johnson hardly allowed it to happen. It came about because of stupid errors with both the Liberty's captain, and the Israelis.
Creating refugees, and refusing them help is equally despicable.
As far as your "few token cookies" is concerned - Johnson's civil rights legislation was nothing short of revolutionary. Millions of Americans who had been denied their rights were given them. But Johnson was in a war, and was determined to win. I highly doubt if his actions would have been any different than if he was fighting white people.
It's apples and oranges comparing Trump to Johnson. Trump made it clear he doesn't want people in this country who he considers to be inferior, and that's the problem I have with him.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Lintar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Nov 2012
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,777
Location: Victoria, Australia

24 Feb 2018, 9:46 pm

Aniihya wrote:
Obamacare for example penalized the poor if they could afford healthcare...


If people in the U.S. can afford private healthcare, then I don't really think they are so poor after all. The very definition of being "poor" is an inability to afford the basics, the essentials (like health coverage).



Aniihya
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2015
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 771

25 Feb 2018, 7:06 am

It was a typo it was supposed to mean "couldn't afford healthcare".



JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

25 Feb 2018, 12:47 pm

Bill- He used it because the enemy were good at hiding in their own territory so the US just launched attacks to kill everything in site, including so many people. Nepalm was also used which is even worse. LBJ saw these non white people as less than cockroaches so it laughable to suggest he cared about non white people in the US. He would have had an ulterior motive. It had nothing to do with mistakes from the captain. Israel bombed the ship for over 2 hours and planned to blame it on Egypt. The trouble being for them that some men on the ship survived. LBJ was aware of the bombing and just let it continue.
Nope, destroying a country and killing a million people in one country is a billion times worse than not letting refugees in.
Trump made nothing clear, as there is no evidence he said such a thing. Even if he did say it, he would have a good point. It would be insane to let large swaths of people flood in from a hell hole country. The worst thing is the evil people who destroyed those countries. Clinton being one, but getting 'charity money' and just keeping it.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

25 Feb 2018, 3:50 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Bill- He used it because the enemy were good at hiding in their own territory so the US just launched attacks to kill everything in site, including so many people. Nepalm was also used which is even worse. LBJ saw these non white people as less than cockroaches so it laughable to suggest he cared about non white people in the US. He would have had an ulterior motive. It had nothing to do with mistakes from the captain. Israel bombed the ship for over 2 hours and planned to blame it on Egypt. The trouble being for them that some men on the ship survived. LBJ was aware of the bombing and just let it continue.
Nope, destroying a country and killing a million people in one country is a billion times worse than not letting refugees in.
Trump made nothing clear, as there is no evidence he said such a thing. Even if he did say it, he would have a good point. It would be insane to let large swaths of people flood in from a hell hole country. The worst thing is the evil people who destroyed those countries. Clinton being one, but getting 'charity money' and just keeping it.


War is Hell. I doubt anyone ever carried on a human war.
Again, the enemy was the enemy. I highly doubt the skin color of people mattered much to Johnson. Remember, he was fighting alongside Vietnamese against another group of Vietnamese.
As for s**thole countries - Benjamin Franklin, quite uncharacteristically, proved to be very much a nativist when it came to what we today call the Pennsylvania Dutch, who had come from the Electoral Palatinate on Germany's Rhineland. He spoke disparagingly about these German Americans, saying how their foreign ideas and dark hair (no, I'm not making that part up) were harmful to America. Or in other words, they were unwanted people from s**thole countries. As a matter of fact, my Black Sea German forebears had been also from the Palatinate area (by that time disintegrated by Napoleon, and redistributed to its neighbors), who had been invited to settle in Russia, before eventually coming to America. The moral of that story is, those Pennsylvania Dutch and Black Sea Germans are today everyday Americans, while the home of their ancestors is today an industrial and cultural titan, hardly a s**thole. The same will be said of the descendants of the people who came to America from those "s**thole countries."
For the record: I'm quite familiar with Trump's opinions on people, and so I don't doubt for a second that he said it.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

25 Feb 2018, 4:45 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Bill- He used it because the enemy were good at hiding in their own territory so the US just launched attacks to kill everything in site, including so many people. Nepalm was also used which is even worse. LBJ saw these non white people as less than cockroaches so it laughable to suggest he cared about non white people in the US. He would have had an ulterior motive. It had nothing to do with mistakes from the captain. Israel bombed the ship for over 2 hours and planned to blame it on Egypt. The trouble being for them that some men on the ship survived. LBJ was aware of the bombing and just let it continue.
Nope, destroying a country and killing a million people in one country is a billion times worse than not letting refugees in.
Trump made nothing clear, as there is no evidence he said such a thing. Even if he did say it, he would have a good point. It would be insane to let large swaths of people flood in from a hell hole country. The worst thing is the evil people who destroyed those countries. Clinton being one, but getting 'charity money' and just keeping it.


War is Hell. I doubt anyone ever carried on a human war.
Again, the enemy was the enemy. I highly doubt the skin color of people mattered much to Johnson. Remember, he was fighting alongside Vietnamese against another group of Vietnamese.
As for s**thole countries - Benjamin Franklin, quite uncharacteristically, proved to be very much a nativist when it came to what we today call the Pennsylvania Dutch, who had come from the Electoral Palatinate on Germany's Rhineland. He spoke disparagingly about these German Americans, saying how their foreign ideas and dark hair (no, I'm not making that part up) were harmful to America. Or in other words, they were unwanted people from s**thole countries. As a matter of fact, my Black Sea German forebears had been also from the Palatinate area (by that time disintegrated by Napoleon, and redistributed to its neighbors), who had been invited to settle in Russia, before eventually coming to America. The moral of that story is, those Pennsylvania Dutch and Black Sea Germans are today everyday Americans, while the home of their ancestors is today an industrial and cultural titan, hardly a s**thole. The same will be said of the descendants of the people who came to America from those "s**thole countries."
For the record: I'm quite familiar with Trump's opinions on people, and so I don't doubt for a second that he said it.


He bombed the South Vietnamese with chemical weapons too so we can ignore that point.
And it seems the rest of that drivel was just to avoid the points.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

25 Feb 2018, 8:00 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Bill- He used it because the enemy were good at hiding in their own territory so the US just launched attacks to kill everything in site, including so many people. Nepalm was also used which is even worse. LBJ saw these non white people as less than cockroaches so it laughable to suggest he cared about non white people in the US. He would have had an ulterior motive. It had nothing to do with mistakes from the captain. Israel bombed the ship for over 2 hours and planned to blame it on Egypt. The trouble being for them that some men on the ship survived. LBJ was aware of the bombing and just let it continue.
Nope, destroying a country and killing a million people in one country is a billion times worse than not letting refugees in.
Trump made nothing clear, as there is no evidence he said such a thing. Even if he did say it, he would have a good point. It would be insane to let large swaths of people flood in from a hell hole country. The worst thing is the evil people who destroyed those countries. Clinton being one, but getting 'charity money' and just keeping it.


War is Hell. I doubt anyone ever carried on a human war.
Again, the enemy was the enemy. I highly doubt the skin color of people mattered much to Johnson. Remember, he was fighting alongside Vietnamese against another group of Vietnamese.
As for s**thole countries - Benjamin Franklin, quite uncharacteristically, proved to be very much a nativist when it came to what we today call the Pennsylvania Dutch, who had come from the Electoral Palatinate on Germany's Rhineland. He spoke disparagingly about these German Americans, saying how their foreign ideas and dark hair (no, I'm not making that part up) were harmful to America. Or in other words, they were unwanted people from s**thole countries. As a matter of fact, my Black Sea German forebears had been also from the Palatinate area (by that time disintegrated by Napoleon, and redistributed to its neighbors), who had been invited to settle in Russia, before eventually coming to America. The moral of that story is, those Pennsylvania Dutch and Black Sea Germans are today everyday Americans, while the home of their ancestors is today an industrial and cultural titan, hardly a s**thole. The same will be said of the descendants of the people who came to America from those "s**thole countries."
For the record: I'm quite familiar with Trump's opinions on people, and so I don't doubt for a second that he said it.


He bombed the South Vietnamese with chemical weapons too so we can ignore that point.
And it seems the rest of that drivel was just to avoid the points.


Now we're just arguing in circles. :lol:


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


cberg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,183
Location: A swiftly tilting planet

25 Feb 2018, 10:21 pm

If anything this proves that 'worst president' is completely subjective.

I don't want anything to do with a country that self-righteously emulates prewar Germany.


_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos :mrgreen:


RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,932
Location: Adelaide, Australia

26 Feb 2018, 12:51 am

DarthMetaKnight wrote:
William McKinley: Tried to annex the Philippines.
Did he succeed?


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,932
Location: Adelaide, Australia

26 Feb 2018, 1:28 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
Nixon would have been a decent President had there been no Watergate and cover-up.

Did Nixon do anything else bad?


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

26 Feb 2018, 1:42 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
Nixon would have been a decent President had there been no Watergate and cover-up.

Did Nixon do anything else bad?


Actually, he had accomplished some rather progressive things, such as establishing the EPA. Had he not been consumed with his own paranoia, and had not surrounded himself with people as equally paranoid as himself, all with a siege mentality in the White House, Nixon might have gone down in history as one of America's greatest Presidents.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

26 Feb 2018, 1:47 am

Lintar wrote:
Aniihya wrote:
Obamacare for example penalized the poor if they could afford healthcare...


If people in the U.S. can afford private healthcare, then I don't really think they are so poor after all. The very definition of being "poor" is an inability to afford the basics, the essentials (like health coverage).


Some people in the U.S can afford private healthcare...a lot of people are either on medicaid, medicare or just go without till something gets so bad they have to go to the E.R.


_________________
We won't go back.