this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
1004 points (96.9% liked)

politics

19128 readers
2663 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Fox News reported on some new presidential rankings, which purportedly show Barack Obama as the #6 president in U.S. history and Donald Trump dead last, and MAGA was not happy.

Fox News on Sunday posted an article about the new rankings by the Presidential Greatness Project, which Fox describes as "a group of self-styled experts." It states that Abraham "Lincoln topped the list of presidents in the 2024 Presidential Greatness Project expert survey for the third time, following his top spot in the rankings in the 2015 and 2018 versions of the survey."

...

"Rounding out the top five in the rankings were Franklin Delano Roosevelt at number two, George Washington at three, Theodore Roosevelt at four, and Thomas Jefferson at five," according to the report. "Trump was ranked in last place in the survey, being ranked worse than James Buchanan at 44, Andrew Johnson at 43, Franklin Pierce at 42, and William Henry Harrison at 41."

The report states that Obama and Joe Biden "ranked an average of 6th and 13th, respectively, among Democrat respondents, and 15th and 30th by Republicans."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] testfactor 27 points 9 months ago (3 children)

Worst is a pretty high bar to clear though. Like, Jackson literally committed the Trail of Tears, genociding all the Indians against the express orders of the SCOTUS, who he told to pound sand because he controlled the army and there wasn't jack or shit they could do to stop him.

Like, Trump was real real bad for sure, but like, Trail of Tears, literal death marches at gunpoint bad? Idk.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Wait until his second term and you will probably agree with the lowest possible rank for Trump.

Or you can make the sort of detached cynical and dehumanizing raw numbers argument that without Trump doing basically everything he could to fuck up handling covid and spread insane misinformation, he is largely the most responsible of all people in America for covid deaths beyond basically the first wave, roughly 9 times more people than were killed/displaced/genocided than Jackson's trail of tears.

I dont even want to attempt to get into some kind of moral argument about which of those things is worse, so there ya go, numbers based.

[–] ganksy 8 points 9 months ago

Just to add I think you could make some of the same arguments for the degrading of healthcare/social safety nets and the EPA. If we're purely talking numbers and not specific cruelty.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 1 points 9 months ago

I imagine you would compare the US numbers with peer nations to get an estimate how much is on him.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

One of the many fucked up things Trump did--there are so many that it's easy to forget--was meeting with Navajo tribe veterans under a Jackson portrait. He loves Jackson and would repeat all Jackson did if he could.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I mean, trump would have loved to create his own trail of tears (not that he knows what that was, historically). I guess it's reasonable to deny credit for what he wanted to do versus what someone actually did, though.