Just wondering what the general consensus is. And why do you think that way?
2007-03-20 19:16:55 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
There are three:
Harding, because of the corruption in his administration. It was HIS actions (and Coolidge's) that led to the Great Depression.
Nixon, because of HIS corruption. Other than that, he was a good president, though. At least, good enough to get us out of Vietnam.
Carter, because even though he was a great MAN, he was a weak president. His economics? A failure. Foreign policies? A failure. He gutted our military, gutted defense spending...he was just overall utterly ineffective. We should have elected a STRONG president, which he was not.
2007-03-20 21:10:26 · answer #1 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The attack on Pearl Harbor killed 2400 Americans and wounded another 1200. There is absolutely NO proof that FDR let the Japanese attack us. That is the stupidest right-wing garbage that I've ever heard. He could have accomplished the same thing (America going to war against the Japanese) if before the attack started, all the ships were moved out of the Harbor and were in fighting mode. We wouldn't have lost such a tremendous number of men and ships, we would have done incredible damage to the Japanese air force and the American people would have still been ready to go to war!
In the war in Iraq, there have been more than 3,220 American troops killed and more than 23,000 wounded, and counting.
In the years to come, G W Bush will go down as, by far, in a class by himself, the WORST President EVER.
He's so bad that no other President should even be mentioned in the same DAY as Bush. The world pretty much hates us now and he is the reason.
2007-03-21 03:40:34 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
FDR's 'New Deal' programs made government huge and wasteful beyond belief, and has destroyed the prosperity of the people. The marxist-socialist programs has led to a welfare state which is abused to the detriment of the working class and the entire country in general.
Wilson would be right up there with signing the Federal Reserve Act, making the entire country indebted to and slaves to the bankers that now run the country and the office of President.
2007-03-21 13:18:30 · answer #3 · answered by tj 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If I can't say Bush, can I write his name down on paper very quietly? Warren G. Harding is the name that most historians come up with. He defines the word incompetence. His own father told him that if he had been born a girl he would always be in the family way because he could not say no. He once had an affair with a hat and coat check girl. Everyone around him stole the government blind while he was president. The economy was so robust that even he couldn't screw it up, much like our current president, whose name I can't say.
2007-03-21 02:42:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I will go with FDR. he sacrficed many lives in Hawaii just to get us into WWII. not that I'm not saying that sending help over to europe to save millions of people from what was going on over there, or sending people over to asia to save millions of people over there was bad either. but did he have to let all those U.S. service men be sacrificed in order to make his point. I think not. Then again now that I think about it this sounds eerily like what slick willie did with good old Osama bin laden. We had a chance to take that one out back in the 1990's but good old Clinton refused to go after an international terrorist even after he had bombed the world trade center parking garage do to the fact that some American forces might get hurt or killed stopping one of the worlds most wanted men. Heaven forbid. well that's ok, now we can't even find the guy anymore and he only has caused the deaths of thousands of innocent people. Definately not worth risking a few U.S special forces personel over.
2007-03-21 02:37:32 · answer #5 · answered by nyxcat1999 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Ford was the worst....the fall guy for a felony charge....criminal before he even took office.
Not elected, not a leader, a yes man figure head
who denied the USA justice and sent a message
that most crime is good. He sanctified the double
standard. He took one too many hits on the head
in football.
Can you imagine him as your lawyer? Scary.
2007-03-21 02:23:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
WHY HASN'T ANYONE MENTIONED GOOD OLE "WE MUST DO THIS THE CHRISTIAN WAY". GOOD OLE BOY FROM PLAINS, GEORGIA, NONE OTHER THAN JIMMY CARTER. TALK ABOUT A NON LEADER, WITH ABSOLUTELY NO FOREIGN RELATIONS TRAINING, HE SOLD OUT THE MILITARY AND COULDN'T EVEN STAND UP TO IRAN SO OUR PEOPLE THERE HAD TO SUFFER THROUGH THE WHOLE ORDEAL. WAY TO GO JIMMY. FOLLOWING JIMMY IS BOTH OF THE BUSHS, HOOVER AND PIERCE ARE UP THERE TOO.
2007-03-21 02:32:17 · answer #7 · answered by BOOMBOOMBILLY 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why can't I say Bush? That's who I want to say. Is it both Bush's that our immune, b/c Bush Sr. is my second choice. Third would have to be Andrew Jackson because of how he mistreated the Indians. (trail of tears, etc). Oh yeah almost forgot about Herbert Hoover and his lovely "hoovervilles" that's a tie for 3rd worst then.
2007-03-21 02:20:37 · answer #8 · answered by ♥austingirl♥ 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Toss up between Ronald Reagan or Herbert Hoover.
2007-03-21 02:20:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well the next worse from you know who (I didn't say Bush) was Reagan, he spent the country into near bankruptcy. Just like you know who. What makes you know who worse is the war, based on you know who's lies. That makes you know who the worst and Reagan second. Both were crooks and Reagan is a traitor, he sold arms to our enemy's. Got away with it.
2007-03-21 02:25:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋