Does worst mean:
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
You probably know it way better than the average American. I say this not only as an American, but as one who has been outside North America. I find that our own perspective on us is pretty skewed, and it takes a lot of work to set it straight. More than most of us are willing to do.
I don't care about others opinions on this one bit, for my money. When looking at how much long term damage they have done to the country, our global relations and to the world in general; it's Donald and it's not even a close contest.
Agree with most of the comments about jackson being the worst, but I'm surprised no one's mentioned Eisenhower and Hoover, who would easily go in the top ten.
I also wanted to throw Truman in the ring for signing off nuclear strikes on mainly civilian targets (i.e. cities) and for the American war crimes in Korea (but I mainly blame MacArthur for that) but he also fired MacArthur and roasted him and the other generals whilst doing so. So maybe somewhere in the top 15 to 25. If MacArthur's run for president had succeeded tho we'd have another strong candidate.
Reagan
George W Bush Jr.
Yes I am handing him the worst president title, even over Trump.
Because, it was his mishandled War on Terror, that plunged the country into massive national debt. He crashed the housing market. He literally had waged a war on obese people, minorities and other things as distractions from his failure to capture Osama. He allowed American Surveillance with Patriot Act I and II. His cabinet were all crooks and he was just a dumb puppet.
He is essentially the ripple effect of everything we're dealing with today and Trump is merely the symptom of that.
I agree. Bush Jr. was the one who broke the window, Trump is just the inevitable crackhead who climbed in and started living on the couch.
Ronald Reagan did more damage to this country than any president before or after him.
Just wait until the turd tanks the economy 1920s style.
I'm continually shocked by how often I learn of some structural systemic issue, pull the thread to see where it started and- oh, surprise, it was once again Reagan.
Most of Reagan's agenda came from the heritage foundation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eeCPRD0Hgg&t=0
The capital class controls the heritage foundation and through their countless think tanks, lobbyist, donations, SuperPACs, etc they control the Republican party and even a large part of the Democratic party.
Marx was correct when he argued that economic democracy was necessary for political democracy. When the wealthy get to own the economy they have the entire country by the balls.
Marx was correct when he argued that economic democracy was necessary for political democracy. When the wealthy get to own the economy they have the entire country by the balls.
Funnily enough even Adam Smith warned about that even before capitalism went in full swing.
Adam Smith: you gotta bust up monopolies because competition drive's innovation
the rich: you heard the man! all the wealth has to be consolidated with us! greed is good!
It's no coincidence that Reagan and Margaret Thatcher had such a close relationship - they thought alike.
In Britain, Thatcher is still reviled by many for sweeping changes. Killed the coal industry without giving support to the many thousands employed there and put the North into recession, took milk away from children, depowered the unions (which were too powerful at the time, tbf) and generally put the Tory Party on the London & Banks first mantra that they've been on ever since.
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.
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.
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).
Andrew Jackson???
Andrew Jackson was also a bastard, especially for his treatment of natives. But I meant Johnson.
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.
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
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.
Wasn't it Nixon who sold the americans out? Or Truman?
lol trump is bad but not like Andrew Jackaon bad.
Probably
Might have some memory gaps, but these are what I can remember from the top of my head.
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.
andrew jackson (or johnson can never remember which) for the trail of tears. absolutely awful
Andrew Jackson was Trail of Tears, but I actually think Andrew Johnson was arguably worse. He was Lincoln's Democrat vice president (he was brought on to help "balance the ticket" instead of sticking with his strongly abolitionist first term VP Hannibal Hamlin), who started dismantling reconstruction and giving the power back to the former slaveowners.
You can pretty much lay Jim Crow at his feet.
This question is too difficult, there are too many candidates...
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~