Based Jimmy Carter

Jimmy Carter was ahead of the game when it came to conserving energy.

...

inb4shitstorm

umm, racist???

Jimmy Carter isn't one to lie. Maybe he really did see one or maybe he saw something that he couldn't explain so he believed it must of been a UFO.

>banned filthy persians from entering the US and deported the rest with student visa's
A true hero of the American people.

MALAISE FOREVER

umm, nigger???

bump

Nixon easily.
Pretty much all his personal tapes point to a man that cared very much for his country's future and was aware of the history of empires.
He's also the reason why there's at least some civility in relations with China.
Bonus points for shitting on California's elite for being utter degenerates and wanting to spread it.

...

...

Double post of same picture confirms it.

Carter the fuckboi*

Cant Shimmy the Jimmy

After taking an economics class, I've come to the conclusion that peacetime presidents are remembered almost entirely based on how the economy was while they're in office. A peacetime president with numerous scandals will remembered well if the economy was good during his turn. Conversely, a president who has a clean record will be remembered poorly if the economy was bad while he was in office.

...

He also commited treason. For America though.

Makes sense.
What can we conclude from war time presidents then?

...

Wartime presidents tend to be remembered very well in general, with Bush II being the notable exception.

Nixon was pretty damn progressive when it came to woman rights. Pretty based honestly.

When Watergate first came out, nobody gave a fuck. It only became an issue after the economy went sour and people started demanding blood. If Nixon could have completed his term before the business cycle started to slow down, he would have never been impeached.

Consider this a sequel to my post: here.

can someone explain his role in sabotaging the Saigon talks
i want to accept him as based but that looks bad

The biggest problem was the stagflation which Carter intensified causing more poverty than he solved.

Also the problem with the Susan B Anthony coin was that it resembled a quarter.

>no based Eisenhower

Jesus

Underrated president coming through.

>two non-consecutive terms

How did the mad-man do it?

Through intermediaries, Nixon told the South Vietnamese ambassador to not negotiate with the North until he got elected. Nixon was known to be a hard anti-Commie and assured the South Viets that he would bring them better terms. That is INCREDIBLY reckless and illegal for a former Vice-President to do.

I wouldn't say I'm an admirer of Nixon because for such a brilliant man (especially in geopolitics), he was incredibly lacking in ethics. But this as well as Watergate blackened his reputation and administration. If he had the good sense to not do either shit, he would've finished his 2nd term with honor.

His first term was great, but his second term had him give in too much to big business. I'm all for free enterprise, but the later trusts had to be busted.

I do give Cleveland credit though for being an efficient and honest administrator; something you rarely see in politics. He's probably the most overlooked Democratic president; especially when you realize between Johnson and Wilson, he was the only Democratic president. The rest were all Republicans.

Nixon was economically liberal and socially conservative; a curious mix compared to his Rockefeller Republicans and the neo-cons of the Reagan 80's. In some regards, he did the right thing, on others, he was WAY off track.

>Forty years ago this month, Lyndon Johnson was agonized to know that Americans thought of him as the architect not of equal rights and Medicare but the hated Vietnam War. Feeling like an unappreciated outcast, the ex-president, often depressed, repeatedly listened to Simon & Garfunkel’s “Bridge Over Troubled Water.” It sounds incredible that LBJ should be attracted to that anthem by the passionately antiwar singers, until you remember the lyrics: “When you’re weary, feeling small, when tears are in your eyes… And friends just can’t be found…”

>Johnson had suffered three major heart attacks and knew he did not have long to live. He incessantly recalled that Johnson men died before reaching 65 years old, and he was 64.

pbs.org/newshour/rundown/lbjs-last-interview/

Carter was a good man, but wasn't up for President. You need to have a certain degree of ruthlessness and political decisiveness as a head of government; Carter did not have these qualities and the nation paid for it dearly.

This is why Presidents should be content in being in office for one term. Only 2 Presidents had successful administrations with 2 terms; Theodore Roosevelt and Calvin Coolidge.

If Johnson just finished out Kennedy's term, he'd be highly regarded for the Civil Rights Act as well as his job growth legislation. Maybe not in the top tier, but certainly higher than his current status.

Didn't Truman or Eisenhower also claim to see one?

maybe after his presidency but during his presidency it was rather lack luster.

>Bad Call on the mid east crisis

>Good call on the deregulation of the economy with Alfred E Kahn

He split the Department of Health, Education and Welfare into more specialized branches Department of Education and Department of Health and Human Services for better over site as well as better management.

Shut down the Briggs Initiative, /pol/ would be outraged but personally I don't really care. He dropped top rate taxes from 98% to 28%, Created 103 million acres of National Park Land in Alaska. He added NHI tax 1.45%. Tried to create cost controls on healthcare but was defeated. Created the Department of Energy to conserve energy, which now makes it impossible for America to export a very limited select amount of oil. Created price controls on oil and gas lines which lead to severe shortages. He signed the National Energy Act and Public Utilities Regulatory Policy Act. These lead to the initial start for the Green Energy Industry.

With the first 2 years of his presidency as pretty comfy with growth and no real "crisis" on hand it was kinda looking like he was going to be a 2 term president until the shit hit the fan. With the Oil shortages and double digit inflation in the second half. He appointed Volkner but unfortunately with all things economic wise, shit doesn't turn on a dime.

this is the most contrarian opinion in the united states

carter and the 70's were shit

the only people who like jim are the dumb hicks who voted for him

>When Watergate first came out, nobody gave a fuck. It only became an issue after the economy went sour and people started demanding blood.

For real?

bump

a given

He gave us Social Security. A bomb that's going to go off in a few years.

We need to raise the retirement age, but senors give us hell whenever we tell them that.

You can get away with anything if the market is good while you're in office. Conversely, if the market is bad while you're in office, you can't get away with anything at all. You can also see this in terms of how authority figures (government officials, corporate leaders, etc) are portrayed in movies. When the economy is bad, the authorities are portrayed as corrupt, incompetent, wasteful, ineffectual, etc. When the economy is good, those same types of people are portrayed as benevolent protectors working for the good of society.

>A bomb that's going to go off in a few years.
Even if you're right, it served us well for 80 years, which is pretty impressive.

I'm trying really hard to refute that, but as far as my limited memory goes, that actually sounds right. Neat idea.

what a useless post, I'm asking about watergate I don't need a high schooler to explain the world in general to me.

He gave old people the idea that they're entitled to a retirement paid for by current young workers. It's a ponzi scheme.

I used to think positively of Nixon. Now my opinion is more mixed.

Ending Breton Woods was a crime against humanity. I accept that thanks to the Triffin Dilemma he had to do it, and that ultimately the system was set up to fail from the beginning because it used the USD instead of the Bancor, but ultimately the fact he didn't try and reform the system and instead unilaterally ended it falls on his shoulders.

The removal of capital controls and subsequent unleashing of globalisation has caused both economic and political troubles that we still face to this day. Democracy is weakened by the need to always keep our eyes on the international financial markets, always fear capital flight if we put up taxes, always fear economic interventionism.

Wages have stagnated in the first world so that we can buy goods more cheaply from the third (where they are manufactured without account for the conditions of workers) instead of retaining parity and manufacturing domestically.

I usually have these thoughts much more coherently articulated. Nixon was an impressive man and it's very well to say that in the circumstances of the time getting the world's nations to agree to a reformed Breton-Woods system was all but impossible, but the consequences of that failure will be with us for a long time. 2008 perhaps provided another chance, but we refused it to our peril.

He stayed a second term because he thought he could do more, and he loved being in charge. His second term did see some important legislation, but you're right that Vietnam ruined it. He actually played a major role in brokering the peace after he was no longer in office though. That's why I take issue with . Other than opening China, Nixon just built on LBJ's work. Johnson initiated arms talks, was probably more invested in Civil Rights than any other President, and began passing Environmental Protection Laws before the creation of the EPA. Even though they hated each other, Nixon and Johnson were both pretty good Presidents.

I don't think it makes sense to attribute it to anything the government did, or anything anyone did, really. It's just the result of falling iq, ever increasing autism, and ever increasing degeneracy of society. The proximate causes only make it happen faster

With that said,

>capital controls
>interest rate deregulation
>ending of Bretton Woods

Mah nigga

>Adding Departments
>Increasing the size of the Federal Government
>based

>deregulation of the economy with Alfred E Kahn
>dropped top rate taxes from 98% to 28%
Wait, so he's to blame for those? Always thought that was more a Reagan kind of thing.
Kind of like it if true, though. It makes it feel more like a move of desperation than an ideological move, which in turn adds to the tragedy that was the collapse of what in the UK was called the postwar consensus and which had some similarities to the general economies of the world from 1945-1979/early 80s. (i.e. stagflation largely caused by oil price fuckery which would resolve itself in time, but during the intervening period neoliberal ideologues managed to take power during a crisis and push their ideology.)

youtube.com/watch?v=kakFDUeoJKM
To be honest while I definitely did enjoy watching it, this has filled me with a deep malaise.

I think it's because of the part where he talked about how people are obsessed with what they can consume, while I know with hindsight we were teetering on the consumerist 1980s (where he'd be told to fuck off) and we've continued down the path of consumption to this day.

Consumerism is a disease.

What about this guy?

I LIKE IKE

Fuck off conservative scum, he literally did nothing. Actually, nothing at all.

>carter tells americans to live within their means, conserve energy, good long-term thinking
>hated by everyone
>reagen encourages consumerism, living above your means, getting mortgages and insurances you can't afford
>loved by everyone

I guess Americans just like to be fat, hooked on anti-depressants and polluting the environment.

...

>>carter tells americans to live within their means, conserve energy, good long-term thinking
see, this is what bugs me.
why is he hated for that?

That's the point, it was a prosperous conflict/scandal free tenure and he didn't fuck around trying to do unnecessary shit.

DON'T TREAD ON ME REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

1: people don't like hearing bad things
2. he was disliked for plenty of other things and would have been viewed as the reason for less optimism

He wasn't successful enough for his supporters to defend him, he wasn't even that interested in defending himself. He's just an easy target.

Families are ponzi schemes, too?

The way you phrased that makes it seem like he personally broke into the DNC headquarters.

He didn't nor did he condone those kinds of actions, but out of loyalty to his party he covered up for the people who did break into the DNC headquarters.

Or that's what I've been led to believe.

What has made social security such a "bomb"?

How come it worked in the past?

Could increasing the employment rate amongst the young population cause the system to work again?

It's an empty right wing retard talking point as old as social security itself.

>carter intensified stagflation
Bruh. He let Volcker cause a recession to stop stagflation, and it worked. The open market operations didn't end up curbing inflation until Reagan was president, but let's remember who appointed Volcker.

>a bomb that's going to go off in a few years
Sure thing buddy.

Carter is a bottom 5 president and this thread is shit

Social security is one giant ponzi scheme without enough new investors. It should be wound up tomorrow, but the government will continue it for as long as possible because it employs thousands and thousands of bureaucrats.

Putting younger generations to work for the generations before is just what families do.

You have to quit while you're ahead. Polk was a 1-term president and a very successful one at that. He's one of the few officials that kept all his campaign promises.

Nixon was intelligent and effective at administration, but he made a complete asshat of himself and stained the Presidency with his actions. I really don't care for him or Johnson to be honest though I do recognize that they pushed for vital bills that the nation needed.

> put solar panels on the white house
> Reagan took them off

why is this considered something to be bragged about by Republicans?

>heh he sure showed those envirocucks heh what a mad man

pathetic

>got elected only because Ford was an unelected president and tainted by Nixon.
>did the right thing in not giving up the Shah for the hostages.
>his economic policies lead to the boom times of Reagan.
>oil deregulation lead to downfall of soviet union.
>last honest man in washington that isn't a Paul.
>crisis of confidence speech

only screw ups
>after the first military rescue mission failed. he should have sent another.
>improper response to soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
>nuclear moratorium after 3 mile island. basically killed the conversion to all nuclear power in the USA.
>crisis of confidence speech

bump

>nuclear moratorium after 3 mile island. basically killed the conversion to all nuclear power in the USA.

This is the one that bothers me the most. Three Mile Island actually proved that modern reactors were fail safe. Even though there was a meltdown, all the radiation was contained.

Apparently the immediate reaction was actually rather positive, it's only with hindsight it's been taken negatively since things only got worse for him.

But I've seen it said a few times that he was "Shirking his responsibility" and "Blaming the American people"

Which is what he gets for trying to appeal to personal responsibility. Americans only like personal responsibility as an excuse for not helping other people. If you actually want Americans to be responsible, you need to force them and alter norms that way because otherwise they're just going to misbehave.

You don't need new investors if you alter how it's contributed to/funded, though. We have an economic system predicated on continued growth. So long as you accept that, you can accept growing social security costs in turn.

(Though I don't know the nuances of funding social security in the USA and would quite like to see it eventually abolished and replaced with basic income, funded out of general taxation and in particular through taxing automated labour. a society where machines slave for human benefit)

>carter tells americans to live within their means, conserve energy, good long-term thinking

>why is he hated for that?

Nobody likes being told that their problems are at least partially their own fault and they need to improve themselves.

Mask was a pretty good biopic

>Three Mile Island actually proved that modern reactors were fail safe
Didn't TMI still have design flaws?

I'm vaguely reminded of Adam Curtis's A-is-for-Atom (a pretty good film all around about the interaction between science, engineering, politics and business.)
youtube.com/watch?v=1ON-EnaRtAw

Though as they take pains to emphasise at the end, the form a technology has at the moment is not inevitably the form that technology must take. The problems of nuclear power were a result of political and economic compromise instead of an inherent flaw of nuclear technology.
With more political will or funding (or technological solutions to reduce the required commitment in those areas) there's absolutely nothing wrong with nuclear.

the whole issue for me is that the whole "you're just gonna have to accept that things are going to get worse and you need to learn to live with them" line of thinking will inevitably be used by Republicans to do shit like abolish social security and the minimum wage

I didn't take it that way to be honest (I took the more optimistic "We'll use less oil and resources, but science and technology will fill the gap and we'll be as prosperous as ever going forwards" view, possibly as I've seen what computers have done for entertainment.), though I suppose the average voter could fall for a stunt like that.

One would hope, however, that someone would be listened to if they pointed out that unless the economy actually went into decline (instead of just stagnating) there's absolutely no justification for such an action.

Yes, TMI had design flaws. I did an entire report on nuclear power a while ago but the details are kind of fuzzy. I'm just going to copy/paste directly from the report I wrote because I don't feel like writing it out again.

>On March 28, 1979, a pump in the plant's secondary coolant system failed, meaning that the system was unable to properly remove heat from the plant's water turbine. As designed, the plant's reactor automatically began to shut down the fission process when excessive heat was detected. More automatic safety measures kicked in, and a valve was opened up to lower the pressure in the system. The system worked as intended, pressure was reduced, and the reactor was shut down.

>This is where the real problem began: the pressure-release valve did not close when it was supposed to. The valve is supposed to open when there is overpressure and then close when things are back under control. The value opened properly when it was time to open but it did not close when pressure went back down. Due to poorly labeled buttons in the plant's control room, attempts to fix the problem only made it worse. A design flaw caused an indicator light in the control room to say that the valve was closed when it was actually open. The operators therefore misdiagnosed the problem and made a series of operating errors that caused the core to overheat. The containment structure became flooded with contaminated water, and a hydrogen bubble formed inside the reactor
.
>In the end, release of radiation from the Three Mile Island facility was prevented, because the containment structure did its job. Indeed, Pete Domenici even suggests that the incident could be offered as proof of nuclear safety because the systems, while flawed, were able to prevent any significant release of radiation despite a meltdown occurring. Three Mile Island continues to function to this day, although the reactor in which the incident occurred is now permanently shut down.

Andrew Jackson was that rare kind of crazy we don't make anymore. Besides, how can anyone hate the man who beat his Assassin to death with a cane, and went after the banks?

>(I took the more optimistic "We'll use less oil and resources, but science and technology will fill the gap and we'll be as prosperous as ever going forwards" view, possibly as I've seen what computers have done for entertainment.)
solar and nuclear revolution soon friend.

who needs that gay shit #shalegas #shaleoil

(Actually, I quite liked seeing how Carter made reference to it in the 70s. It's one of those technologies you tend to ignore until it comes up in the press, so it's always funny to see it pop up in the past.)

the npp has a lot more to do with money than it has to do with peace.