Ronald Reagan did more damage to this country than any president before or after him.
Asklemmy
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
Before or after him so far
I feel like the "so far" is implied...unless you've somehow figured out how to 100% accurately predict the future and you haven't told anyone.
...By the way, if that's the case, rude.
While W. sucked in many ways, there is no way he is the worst. Off the top of my head I can easily think of four better contenders: Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan (both guilty of pro-slavery fuckery before the Civil War), Andrew Johnson (fought to let the Confederates off the hook after the war and opposed the 14th amendment), and Donald Trump (first president to be impeached twice, first to be convicted of a felony, and may be remembered by future historians as the spark that ignites the next Civil War).
donvict ain't done yet, either. i think the damage and legacy he leaves behind, leaking out that giant diaper, will be the worst of the bunch.
Btw. question from Germany regarding Trumps Felony: I read that people convicted of a felony may not vote yet I also read that Trump cast his in Florida. Hoe does it actually work?
He was convicted in New York so Florida doesn't care.
It is complicated because the rules are different in each state. Also, Trump was convicted in New York state but he resides and votes in Florida.
For out-of-state convictions, Florida defers to the other state's rules. New York would allow Trump to vote if he resided there because he is not currently in prison, so Trump can vote in Florida legally.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-felony-conviction-can-he-vote-b95e7b4c9158d999e8bc89b00fbda911
America doesn't have laws and isn't a functioning society.
Question from another European about that, he's convicted but never got a sentence? Or did he and why in that case isn't he serving?
Sentencing was delayed until after Nov. 5th, and now it's been permanently delayed. I'm sure the conviction will be overturned at some point while he's in office
Non burgers here: I believe the sentencing for the conviction was delayed till after the election. And since that they have announced it has been delayed indefinitely.
Andrew Jackson???
Andrew Jackson was also a bastard, especially for his treatment of natives. But I meant Johnson.
It's tempting to pick someone recent, but the real answer is probably Andrew Jackson. He successfully engineered a genocide, trampled the Constitution and human rights, and was actively hostile to limits on Presidential power.
We'll see if 47 surpasses him. He's set up to do so. It's going to be wild to see what happens when Trump order troops to fire into crowds of American citizens.
Reagan
lol trump is bad but not like Andrew Jackaon bad.
Probably
- Andrew Jackson - Crimes against native people
- Andrew Johnson - Fucked up reconstruction
- Ronald Reagan - Trickle down economics
- 45/47 ๐คฎ - We all know why...
- Richard Nixon - The Infamous Crook
Might have some memory gaps, but these are what I can remember from the top of my head.
Don't forget that the SCOTUS appointed by 47 ended the American experiment since Presidents are now effectively kings. Thanks to Presidential immunity, we no longer get to say nobody is above the law.
Elected Temporary Dictator with small restrictions.
They still have to get rid of elections to make thing permanent, and time will tell if they actually managed to do so.
The federal government doesn't run elections, states do. Whether or not states decide to resist the tyranny of the federal government will decide if we will have legitimate elections.
Swing States do not all have a republican trifecta.
Also remember there are non-maga republicans, like Brad Raffensperger.
And president does not yet have unlimited power, only immunity from breaking laws. The president still have to find those yes-men to do their bidding.
He cant just say "Kill all Democrats" on day one. That aint happening. The military isnt maga yet.
It takes time to purge the military. Not every non-maga military member is gonna announce their beliefs. You cant find them all and purge them all in 4 years. Hitler already had a majority of loyalists in the military when he became chancellor. trump does not. Not yet.
When the federal government becones tyrannical, states can declare federal actions unconstitutional and use their state national guards. Then our country's fate is up to the military and national guards.
The US can totally become a dictatorship forever if we don't change course, but there is still time to reverse course.
I dunno, Nixon's fuckery is downright provincial these days.
Reagan definitely deserves a top 5 spot.
This question is too difficult, there are too many candidates...
I would hire nucular George every day for the next 4 years to get rid of the orange dipshit.
It is absolutely fuckin bonkers that Trump is so bad that a person can say they yearn for the good old days with Dubya without a hint of sarcasm
(the upside down book was photo shopped l
I think it does not make it less funny, everyone believes it because it's so in character.
Trump is definitely in the bottom quintile, but also anyone putting him in the bottom 5 is just recency bias.
Most people who argued for Trump said it's because of Jan 6th and his other felonies and that he was allowed to run again and became reelected (even tho a partition of the us citizens are to blame for the latter). I also think people already value him lower because of Project 2025 and out of fear what will happen during his 2nd term.
andrew jackson (or johnson can never remember which) for the trail of tears. absolutely awful
Does worst mean:
- least able to achieve their stated agenda, ie worst at their job. (Trump)
- worst vision for America, ie most evil (Reagan)
- worst overall impact to America, ie one you'd kill with a time machine (Bush Jr, but Trump might catch up in term 2)
- Worst for the world, ie the one I'd kill with a time machine (Washington)
Although I'm not American and don't know your history that well.
Idk I think Jackson beats Reagan there. He was the trail of tears guy. He ran on genocide against the indigenous peoples of the continent and delivered
Going for the low hanging fruit, huh?
I'm having a hard time deciding between grape and kiwi what about you?
Strawberry, for sure
Everyone loves strawberries
(But ngl I just really wanted to know what people would say. I find some answers very reasonable, others quite debatable. But I'd also be interested in what Lemmy thinks is the best president the US has ever had)
It's Reagan or Nixon, no contest. Bush pales in comparison
Plenty of choice. In my view, most presidents were rambling reeking right wingers in some way or other, save for FDR and Teddy Roosevelt, who were the two presidents I'd actually call capable and outspoken on civil rights (rather than just pragmatical like Lincoln). They did have their blemishes, but less than e.g. Andrew Jackson.
So many presidents were terrible for one people or another.
Andrew Jackson? Held hundreds of slaves and quite literally led an ethnic expulsion against Native Americans (the Trail of Tears).
Lincoln? Mostly good, but did not forbid slavery in the form of penal labour. If one were to abolish slavery, why not go the full mile?
Wilson? Rabid antisemite, pretty much.
Hoover? Might've tried to tackle the Great Depression -- but did so by allying with large coorporations, effectively being corrupt and choosing bribery.
Truman? Dropped nukes and set the stage for "we support any government that hates people being remotely leftist".
Nixon - corrupt and wanted to sidestep the rule of law, all for his own profit: to stay in power. Other than thaf, decent, but that's a big "other than that".
Reagan - enough said. Ultracapitalist, misleading, made the US economy far worse by accruing debt like there's no tomorrow, and shoving it onto the poor -- typical oligarch behaviour! Militaristic, power-hungry. And no, he did not end the Cold War: Gorbachov did.
JFK: socially pretty good, actually. But economically, the cutting of the top rates made the richest keep more money. At least it wasn't down below 50%, but still. Had that happened, I think the tax rates would've allowed wealth accumulation.
And so on.
So, in my view, it's hard to focus on who is the worse, and better to rather focus on what is the best. Ted would be my candidate. Not only social progress, but also economical, and in a way that favour the worker -- and he also was environmentally aware. That is a good president.
FDR and Teddy Roosevelt, who were the two presidents I'd actually call capable and outspoken on civil rights (rather than just pragmatical like Lincoln). They did have their blemishes
Blemishes? FDR seized the property of 200,000 Americans and threw them into concentration camps because of their race. The guy's bottom 10 if not bottom 5. He's easily the worst Democrat of the last 100 years.
Wasn't it Nixon who sold the americans out? Or Truman?