US presidents

Your post:

>You have no reason to lock caps...

He evidently isn't locking caps since he is typing in caps.

You're dumb.

Are you not an English speaking? He is locking in his caps. Caps lock. Locking caps. CAPITAL letters are locked, AND THEREFORE APPEAR LIKE THIS

Lincoln is easily the best.

Kill yourselves

>Tyrant that suspended habeus corpus

Sure kiddo

JFK because he was going to sign a bill getting rid of the federal reserve and cia.

Caps being locked would entail that they're disabled. If he's typing in caps, it means that caps are enabled, i.e. not locked.

English much?

Wrong

varies wildly by political opinion but I'll try to give a general normie version
best would probably be between Washington, Lincoln, or either Roosevelt. Wilson used to be up here (and sometimes still is) but opinion of him has declined in recent years
Divisive would probably go to Jackson, with Nixon at least people tend to agree he got shit done policy wise but was a shady cunt personally, with Jackson even today people either think he's a saint or satan incarnate
Worst is usually Buchanan, who sadly is the only president from my state, who was a hapless fuck who failed to prevent the civil war breaking out

No, while normies like both flavors of Roosevelt, historians admit they were the ones that started the Godamn view of Presidential stewardship and big govt. oversight that caused all the political problems we have today.

There’s no clear best, only who people like. I like Coolidge cause he fought back the bureaustate Powers, but that’s just me. Some like Roosevelt’s cause they started the soft American pseudo-socialism train, but that’s just opinion

Best American is still tommy paine

>historians admit they were the ones that started the Godamn view of Presidential stewardship and big govt. oversight that caused all the political problems we have today
*some historians
if you think every historian agrees those are the source of all political problems today you need to visit academia sometime

>There’s no clear best, only who people like
applies to everything OP wanted really, these lists are almost inevitably tainted by the personal political convictions of whoever is writing it, only Washington really escapes the partisanship for obvious reasons

No, like Roosevelt literally made the term stewardship, and the principles behind it, and then R2 literally thought up and planned out the ‘rule by thinktank’ way of governing. Disagreeing with that is like saying historians disagree if Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence

Yes cause the US could totally have functioned as a small government after the turn of the century
#sarcasm

I was replying to
>that caused all the political problems we have today
not the first part

Jackson was a horrible president. The only good thing he achieved was resolving the nullification crisis.

wtf ignore me

Mainstream consensus:
>Best: Washington or Lincoln
>Most Divisive: Reagan
>Worst: Andrew Johnson

W. H. Harrison did nothing wrong

>Jackson was a horrible president.

>'best' US president
Washington or Lincoln
>who is most divided
Jackson and Reagan
>was considered the worst
Harding, Buchanan

These are the normie answers. Below are the true answers.

>'best' US president
Wilson
>was considered the worst
Grant

Stay salty southaboos

>Wilson ‘by self determination, I meant self determination for whites, go fuck yourself Ho Chi Minh, no way this ever comes back to haunt America’ Wilson
>even an OK president
‘no’

Wilson was the president of the US not Vietnam, fuck off tankie

I’m saying that Wilson’s rejection of Ho at Paris is what caused him to seek help from Lenin and the Soviets and go full tankie you troglodyte.

Pretty much. Out of all the stock great presidents valued by lefty normies only Washington was worth a damn while the rest gets praised for good intentions even if they failed like Wilson, FDR and Johnson.

While I don't consider Jackson or TR to be among the worst they still get much attention because they were cool, which apparently means more than just good presidency. Both made huge mistakes, Jackson by introducing the spoils system, TR by taking another step into imperial presidency.

Jackson has been considered among the best for years

Based Barack Obama, slayer of the tyrant Gaddafi and owner of whitebois.

>"sorry Clemenceau, I would like to halt these meetings and demand that your nation, which suffered the most casualties in our effort to defeat the central powers, give up all claims to your most profitable overseas colony because some twenty something viet sent me a letter"
Imagine being this stupid

>owner of whitebois

The same ignorance and blind faith in mainstream pop history and old myths. So Adams was bad because Aliens and Sedition Act but Jefferson who had more people arrested because of the same reasons gets off scott free while people list declaration of independence as a list of his achievements AS PRESIDENT.
Similarly Nixon's scandal was far from the worst but it was most public so even though we know about them it's Nixon who became the presidential villain.
Same with Harding who successfully fought the economic depression and balanced the budget but a member of his cabinet was a crook. Wow that's got to be the first time ever right?
Or how Hoover gets called the president who did nothing during the Great Depression even though he was pretty much the architect of what FDR's economic advisors will remake into their own New Deal. Both failed btw.

Why is the level of presidential studies this low? I don't get it.

He actually met with Wilson you moron. Getting Clemenceau to immediately cede the colony would have been nigh impossible, but any response other than ‘yeah, it’s great that you came to me, but like, fuck off’ would have been better.

That's a villain motivation worthy of a Pixar movie.

>He actually met with Wilson you moron
source? from my knowledge he just sent a petition to the american delegation in Paris and there is zero evidence of Wilson even knowing about it. Regardless, trying to pin the problems of Vietnam post WW2 on Wilson is absurd. I was expecting to get criticism of Wilson after my initial post but not this autistic argument lol

Speaking of what ifs, I do wonder how we would have fared had TR somehow beat Wilson

USA joins the war immediately. I don't know about economy. It's weird but all three main candidates in the 1912 elections were progressive so there's a chance presidency would still be imperial. However Roosevelt wouldn't have the same idea about political changes in Europe and League of Nations so political map would've looked much different.

All Jewish puppets

amerimutts worship niggers like joos worship shekels; lincoln freed the nogs, ergo according to them he must be the best. simple as.

You’re right, being a dickbag is the least of his problems. American entry into WW1 was a farcical waste of 110,000 lives, all for the international political capital required for the laughable failure of the League of Nations, very high inflation, and a Red Scare targeting immigrants and labor leaders and pursued by an ostensibly ‘Progressive’ president make Wilson easily one of the worst disasters ever to sit in the Oval Office.

>targeting immigrants
Sounds good desu

>American entry into WW1 was a farcical waste of 110,000 lives
Wilson held onto neutrality as long as he could and had to be persuaded by his cabinet to enter the war after Germany became more and more belligerent. Alternatively TR was ranting for an american invasion as soon as 1914. The US made out like bandits by joining the war effort at the very end, solidifying an entente victory, and earning itself a seat at the bargaining table during peace talks.

>very high inflation
nothing is wrong with inflation, the economy was booming

>a Red Scare
good, anarchists and communists are scum and subversive immigrants have no right to be in this country.

>Worst
Abraham Lincoln violated the Constitution and waged a war of total conquest, agreeing to the murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children, all to make sure he had as much land and power as possible. He exploited the abolitionist movement to get his way, and threw over 100,000 Americans in prison for protesting his terrible war that cost the most American lives of any war American has ever been in. He caused irreparable harm to the country and the wounds of his presidency still have yet to fully heal.

>Best
NOBODY hates Teddy. Fought in wars chased down criminals hunted elephants didn't afraid of anything.
Not sure if he's best but he's impossible to dislike.

>'best' US president,
Washington.
>who is most divided,
Divided and relevant? Lincoln, since southerners and libertarians hate him.
>who was considered the worst
Buchanan.

Conservatives hate Lincoln too. Fuck, everybody who isn't a mouthbreathing idiot hates Lincoln, and even some people who are do too.
So still a big divide.

Harding

>The best
Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR are usually in the top because of their presidencies taking place during the three most defining wars of American history. Outside of those three it's a choice between Eisenhower or JFK.
>The worst
Pierce's staunch anti-abolitionist stance and inability to address conflict between the two sides of the slavery debate escalated tensions. Buchanan's inability to do fucking anything let those tensions boil over. Either is a great pick for the worst president ever.
>Most divided
Depending on whether you ask someone on the right or the left, Ronald Reagan either made America great or set America up for all the social problems it faces today.

Fuck off, Lincoln kept us from becoming a Balkanized shithole. Every death Dixie hick was an added bonus. Traitor scum.

>Fuck, everybody who isn't a mouthbreathing idiot hates Lincoln
>t. John Wilkes Booth

>The Caps Lock key originated as a Shift lock key on mechanical typewriters. An early innovation in typewriters was the introduction of a second character on each typebar, thereby doubling the number of characters that could be typed, using the same number of keys. The second character was positioned above the first on the face of each typebar, and the shift key caused the entire type apparatus to move, physically shifting the positioning of the typebars relative to the ink ribbon. Just as in modern computer keyboards, the shifted position was used to produce capitals and secondary characters.

Do the world a favor and kill yourself, you fucking peasant.

This documentary features many well known American historians but could only be created by a British television. Gives you the idea how one sided and idealistic is his portrayal in the United States.
youtube.com/watch?v=uRQXQRcfMd0

Washington is definitely a good answer when it comes to great Presidents, but usually for the wrong reasons.

No, he wasn't some master tactician or genius strategist who kicked the British out despite being outnumbered and outgunned.

He should instead get credit for being an 18th century Cincinnatus when everyone, both friend and foe, though he'd be in charge until the day he died.

>oversight that caused all the political problems we have today.
So the guy that made it illegal for business to donate to political campaigns, and broke up large trusts is the reason for our current problem of corporations buying laws and politicians, well combining into too big to fail super conglomerates? What?

Any answer but FDR is objectively wrong

>Pleb tier
Lincon
>Retard tier
FDR
>Normie tier
Washington
>Wiseman tier
Reagan
>Patritian tier
Polk

Historians like failed politicians who never did anything right it seems.

>best
Usually considered to be Lincoln or Washington.

>Worst
Usually Buchanan or Harding.

>Divided
Probably someone like Grant or Jackson. Historically they were considered shit (Grant) or near godlike (Jackson) but modern interpretations have become muddier with Grant's reputation starting to be upgraded and Jackson's being downgraded though for mainly social reasons. Grant fought the KKK, Jackson hated Indians.

Not my opinions or anything. Personally I think Grant deserves to go down as a bad President as his presidency was the height of Republican cronyism and Grant was too trusting of his friends do anything about it despite knowing what was going on. Jackson's economic policies were infinitely worse and more disastrous than Indian Removal. Starting a decade long depression because of your hatred of banks needs to be held up as an example of utter stupidity. If somebody loves Jackson you can immediately discard their opinion.

Harding probably gets the most unfair amount of shit. All corruption occurred behind his back and stuff like Teapot Dome weren't big deals in the grand scheme of things. He had a love child but so what? His actual policy/presidency is good when you look at what happened.

>national bank exists because Hamilton spent a fucking decade studying economic trends in Europe to see what the common factors of powerful economies were
>Jackson was some western hick who didn't know shit
>BANKS ARE BAD BECAUSE THEY ARE
>closes the national bank
>makes all land purchasable only in hard currency
>also moves all currency out to rural banks
>banks that run the economy now have no money and start collapsing
>entire economy collapses
>only the discovery of gold out west in the late 1840s is enough to pull the United States out of its hole
There's nothing to really argue with. It's not HURR DURR JEWRY, it's basic fucking common sense.

The first six are widely considered the best. After them, Lincoln and both Roosevelts are considered the best.

Jackson didn't necessarily hate banks, he hated the idea of the federal government handing over the central banking charter to a handful of private financiers in the northeast. The Second Bank of the US had none of checks and balances of the later Federal Reserve. There's also little evidence that it would have even stopped the 1837 panic as the BUS itself was partially the reason for the 1819 panic.

>t. mouthbreathing idiot

>Best
Polk. Easily

t.Patrician

Is that a silhouette of Jackson? I could tell because of the nose.

>While I don't consider Jackson or TR to be among the worst they still get much attention because they were cool, which apparently means more than just good presidency.
Kind of mystifies me that Arthur's regarded as a mediocre President. His term was stable, fairly prosperous, civil service reform, naval reform/updating, left office popular and well-liked enough that even Twain had no problem with him.

He and McKinley should generally fall under underrated. Reagan is horrifically overrated.

tell me why i have heard this before

Don't you a goat or a cousin to fuck Gus?

George Washington is the best president. This is no debate.

Lincoln and Grant will be second best for preserving the Union.

Andrew Jackson is a favorite of mine, he was batshit crazy and ran on the premise he was gonna kill some red skins

>goat
>gus
what the fuck are these stereotypes?

Washington, Jackson, Polk, Teddy, Ike

Washington is the best

richard nixon

oh and McKinley.

Usually Washington is considered the president is Washington for being a mediator between the Jeffersonians and Hamiltonians. Without Washington or similar figure the early Republic would be strife with infighting and possibly destroy itself. Next is Lincoln for ending slavery and restoring the Union after ending the civil war (He started, so without him the whole Fiasco could have been avoided) and then FDR for "restoring the Economy" during the Great Depression. (The New Deal, which was the policies that were supposedly used to restore the economy actually caused continued economic decline)

A few others who were incredibly good but never talked about because they are "Sexist" or "racist" are Jefferson, Jackson, Polk or Madison.

As for worst, well the any of the whig presidents were total disasters.
>Harrison get's pneumonia and dies 6 months into term
>Tyler can not pass anything because congress hates him.
>Taylor is against popular sovereignty, screws up everything, dies
>Fillmore does nothing to try to fix the country
The two democrats before Lincoln were deplorable
>Pierce does let's tensions grow in the USA
>Buchanon increases tensions in USA
Then There's the Republicans after Lincoln
>Johnson does reconstruction, ruins south and pisses off north
>Grant Has affairs, continues to ruin south, and is extremely corrupt
>Hayes Continues corruption and everyone hates him, so much he is assassinated
>Arthur is so retarded noone cares
Arguably, Wilson was terrible. But next in line for sure is Warren G. Harding.
>Has affair and pisses everyone off. Dies so everyone better than him can do better than him.
Next, FDR is finally getting the hate that he should.
>Literally destroys constitution, tradition, and everything so he can continue to rape economy and is only saved by fighting in WWII
>Truman, his successor, is just bad. Let's not talk about it.

I also forgot Nixon, Reagan, and Ike who are arguably the best.
Arguably.

Washington and Teddy Roosevelt are the best. Obama and the guy after Lincoln are considered the worst. Lincoln has the most divided opinion about him

Sorry for stealing your thread but what about British PMs? They have a long history, for sure they must have had some great (and bad) people.

Open your own thread cunt

>historians admit

***youtube celebrities proselytize

And you know, establishing a popular vote and giving everyday citizens political power instead of an elite class and fixing the banks and the time he gave away all that cheese

Obama is probably the second or third most divisive after Lincoln and Reagan.
Nixon could have been one of the best if it wasn't for Watergate.

>Obama is probably the second or third most divisive after Lincoln and Reagan.
He will be seen as an above average president 10 years from now.We are just biased as he was the president a year ago

You're right, we are biased because we're still caught up in him being a black guy and a rebuttal to the bush years. Even then that goodwill is has worn very thin and historical objectivity will show him to be an incompetent, violent, interventionist.

I do want to read more about him. Great backstory

God Tier
>Andrew Jackson
>James K. Polk
>George Washington
>James Madison
>Thomas Jefferson

Meme Tier Presidents
>Teddy Roosevelt
>FDR
>Lincoln
>Coolidge
>JFK
>Reagan
>Clinton

Absolute Shit Tier
>LBJ
>Woodrow Wilson
>George W. Bush

>Clinton
>Lincoln
>Roosevelt
>Three who were skilled as fuck
>Memes
Come on user.

the also did things that were pretty stupid

>Clinton
>caught in dozens of scandals
>totally blocked by Republicans
>sells out his left-wing supporters' interests but can't win the hearts of the right
>only won because of Ross Perot both elections
>main accomplishment was in doing nothing while the internet bubble took off
>skilled
Try lucky

Starting with Eisenhower, all the American Presidents would be executed for their crimes

>"Eisenhower? You could argue over whether his overthrow of the government of Guatemala was a crime. There was a CIA-backed army, which went in under U.S. threats and bombing and so on to undermine that capitalist democracy. I think that’s a crime. The invasion of Lebanon in 1958, I don’t know, you could argue. A lot of people were killed. The overthrow of the government of Iran is another one — through a CIA-backed coup. But Guatemala suffices for Eisenhower and there’s plenty more.

Kennedy is easy. The invasion of Cuba was outright aggression. Eisenhower planned it, incidentally, so he was involved in a conspiracy to invade another country, which we can add to his score. After the invasion of Cuba, Kennedy launched a huge terrorist campaign against Cuba, which was very serious. No joke. Bombardment of industrial installations with killing of plenty of people, bombing hotels, sinking fishing boats, sabotage. Later, under Nixon, it even went as far as poisoning livestock and so on. Big affair. And then came Vietnam; he invaded Vietnam. He invaded South Vietnam in 1962. He sent the U.S. Air Force to start bombing. Okay. We took care of Kennedy.

Johnson is trivial. The Indochina war alone, forget the invasion of the Dominican Republic, was a major war crime.

Nixon the same. Nixon invaded Cambodia. The Nixon-Kissinger bombing of Cambodia in the early ’70’s was not all that different from the Khmer Rouge atrocities, in scale somewhat less, but not much less. Same was true in Laos. I could go on case after case with them, that’s easy.

Ford was only there for a very short time so he didn’t have time for a lot of crimes, but he managed one major one. He supported the Indonesian invasion of East Timor, which was near genocidal. I mean, it makes Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait look like a tea party. That was supported decisively by the United States."

"Carter was the least violent of American presidents but he did things which I think would certainly fall under Nuremberg provisions. As the Indonesian atrocities increased to a level of really near-genocide, the U.S. aid under Carter increased. It reached a peak in 1978 as the atrocities peaked. So we took care of Carter, even forgetting other things.

Reagan. It’s not a question. I mean, the stuff in Central America alone suffices. Support for the Israeli invasion of Lebanon also makes Saddam Hussein look pretty mild in terms of casualties and destruction. That suffices.

Bush. Well, need we talk on? In fact, in the Reagan period there’s even an International Court of Justice decision on what they call the “unlawful use of force” for which Reagan and Bush were condemned. I mean, you could argue about some of these people, but I think you could make a pretty strong case if you look at the Nuremberg decisions, Nuremberg and Tokyo, and you ask what people were condemned for. I think American presidents are well within the range."

James Madison.

>ignoring that 90% of that started with Truman
Why is Chomsky such a fuck