Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bush the elder. I believe he was probably the last Republican who really thought of the country as a whole and tried to do the best for the country as a whole.
He was alright, but I’m not a fan of the neo-con CIA/energy business spooks he surrounded himself with who became further entrenched in his sons administration
Agreed. He said, "I'm a Republican but I'm not nuts about it." Signed the ADA which was the biggest civil rights legislation since the 60's. Strengthened the original 60's civil rights bill. Great at foreign policy. Then mayor of Atlanta Andrew Young said, " With Bush, I always thought he gave a fair deal." Definitely the best repub potus of my lifetime.
Strong but also with some wisdom on when to be strong. His early work with reunified Germany did wonders for European stability. My guess is that his work did more good than Clinton or Reagan could have done in that area at that time.
Someone who worked for the HW Bush Administration came to talk to us in college at the request of a friend (our professor). He came to talk about his career in finance, but he of course shared a few things about the Former President. HW Bush personally hand wrote birthday cards to all his employees and also sent Christmas cards to EVERYONE. And he loved receiving them as well! Talk about a classy man.
He was famous for writing notes. It's one of the secrets of his power. Before Reagan picked him, his highest elected office was in the House of Representatives. But he got appointed to an *amazing* string of offices after that.
Agreed, arguably the best resume of any modern president:
1. Naval officer during WWII.
2. Member of the House of Representatives, 1967-71.
3. Ambassador to the United Nations, 1971-73.
4. Chief of the Liaison Office to the PRC, 1974-75.
5. Director of Central Intelligence, 1976-77.
6. VP, 1981-89.
7. And of course, POTUS, 1989-1993.
If you look at all the elections in my life:
Clinton vs HW Bush
Clinton vs Dole
W Bush vs Gore
W Bush vs Kerry
Obama vs McCain
Obama vs Romney
HRC ...
I'd vote for anyone on either side of this list if it was an option this time.
Yeah. I'm not big on Romney it Kerry but I think both of them had a genuine since of wanting to do what's best for the country as they saw it.
Also, that McCain vs Obama race. Wow. We didn't realize how good we had it. Wish he'd picked Lieberman as his running mate. Might have changed the way we talk about politics.
We used to have a two party system in which qualifications, temperament, and intelligence were valued by both sides. You didn't have to fear that the wrong guy winning would literally destroy the country, it would just be frustrating for a while.
I miss that time.
Same here on HW. And from what I've heard, Eisenhower was evidently the pinnacle of Republican POTUS according to my Boomer Republican friend. Pro education and infrastructure. So two good ones in the last 60 years I guess.
Yup. Lots of people like to talk a big game about Nixon, Eisenhower and Reagan, but I think HW actually had a moral backbone *and* knew to put country over ideology. Every bad thing you can say about him is also something you can say about one or more of the others, and I honestly kinda like him better than Clinton speaking as someone whose closest presidential candidate to his own politics was Debs.
He deserved a second term. Anyone willing to do something unpopular for the true good of the country is a real leader. I’m glad his reputation has been rising at least.
Eisenhower. A lot of people talk about Reagan shaping a generation of Republicans, but I’d say those children born in the 50s/60s were taught about Republicanism by parents who supported Eisenhower.
Eisenhower, dude was willing to praise FDR and the new deal for preventing the US from descending to communism or fascism. Modern day republicans refuse to give FDR any credit.
Eisenhower was the establishment moderate candidate that prevented a conservative like Robert Taft from getting the nomination. The conservatives would have their revenge in 64 and would birth the modern conservative movement in the process.
Eisenhower was solid. Not that great on civil rights (but no one really was -even Kennedy- aside from Truman and LBJ).
LBJ all the way.
Carter is a wonderful human being, but he wasn't a great president
Clinton was charming, played some good politics but there was always something uncomfortably slimy about him.
President Obama wasn't candidate Obama who I supported. His expansions of the NSA surveillance, expansion of the drone war and extrajudicial murder of American citizens (Even if they were terrorists) rubbed me the wrong way.
Generally I believe in minding your own business and don't impede on the people with gross over-governance. When I was a teen I was watching in horror with what Bush II started with the birth of drone warfare and the Patriot act. Obama seemed to be against it so I was with him when I could vote. I'm old enough now to understand why Bush and his boys did what he did in the shadow of 9/11 (I don't like it, but I get the fog of war), but the expansion under Obama felt dystopian to me at the time at least and the drone programs high body count of innocent people was just mind numbing.
To me the Democratic Party stopped being the Democrats and started being Obama's party where everyone followed his cues and I didn't like the example he became during his 8 years in office. I won't throw anymore stones, I absolutely hate the state of my party as well.
I’m very much a liberal leaning person, but I respect your standing on the principle of limited government. If more republicans were like you, I may actually support them.
I think I still preferred Obama for some of the domestic decisions over Bush or Romney, but his handling of the Middle East is a little sickening. I kind of wish McCain had won simply because I believe he would have pulled us out before stuff went so much further south.
Conservatives simply don’t believe in limited government. They believe in conserving and preserving the values and government formation of the past. This is why it’s not contradictory for conservatives to support gun rights and oppose abortion. Society’s fundamental formation changes with the ability to counteract a pregnancy. Conservatives don’t like the trends that occur. Liberals do.
I think what you're saying is fair to what the party has become, but it isn't aligned with what many genuine conservatives believe. Gun rights, abortion rights, marriage rights, lots of other hot-button issues, traditional conservatives who favor limited government don't see them as issues in a federal election because the federal government shouldn't be making decisions on those issues. The government has injected itself into all kinds of things, and both parties leverage that involvement to try and motivate votes, when in reality much of what the federal government is doing is really outside of what they should be doing at the federal level.
They're almost all slimy in some way. It all about what level of slimy you're comfortable with. I'd have to go back to maybe Truman if I didn't pick LBJ and I didn't want to do democrats dirty (Although you'd probably be happy with that judging on the flair.)
I don't have a party, and in some ways, both parties are opposite me. The last time I identified with a party and still liked the president was Reagan. Not a fan of Bush the Elder, and I was a Democrat when Clinton was president. Haven't really thought anyone in this century was a good president.
EDIT: After reading some comments, I just want to say, Democrats *hated* George HW Bush at the time. It's always weird to read retroactive fondness for people that were despised while in power.
As another president who was hated in their time once said, “You have to wait for the dust to settle.” That was Harry Truman, a man who left office with the lowest approval rating of any president that has been tracked… who is now seen as one of the greatest of all time. I think hindsight has been very kind to HW and that’s not a bad thing. It takes a good leader to do the right thing even if people will hate you for it at the time.
I understand that point and appreciate it, but... Have you noticed that appreciation for presidents like Bush Sr and Reagan is always couched in a critique of the contemporary GOP? "Unlike these terrible hateful monsters today, the GOP used to be made up of good men who...." I suppose I never buy it, because it doesn't chime with what I saw at the time. It's hard to express exactly what I think is happening, but I think it's something like the idea that retroactive fondness is mostly just a way of expressing what is always being expressed, which is hatred right now. If someone says "I actually loved the Democratic Party when it had good men like Kennedy and LBJ, unlike the socialists and degenerates it runs for office today," it's really just a way of hating on the party today. That guy probably hated Kennedy and JFK, too, and with just as much vitriol.
I’ll admit, my like of HW does contain some of that too. But I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing. Politics does not always need to be toxic and praising a good president who your views don’t match up to should be a good thing. It shows the other side (whichever they may be) what qualities even folks who don’t agree with them policy-wise would want to vote for. If that’s a critique of current politics on either side of the aisle isn’t that a much better way to discuss it than partisan flame wars? It allows us to hold the present to the standards of the past, specifically when it comes to our standard bearers wanting to leave positive legacies as well.
I suppose that's true. I agree politics need not always be toxic. My concern is that this kind of retroactive affection IS toxic, a kind of backhanded attack on people now by comparing them to people in the past who no longer represent a threat. Even Romney and McCain were demonized. So to me, I find the comparisons between them and more recent figures somewhat disingenuous. I think it's one of those cases of the longer you live, the more you realize that the past won't be remembered as it really was.
I think we’re just gonna disagree on that then. I think wanting a respectable leader and being able to point across the aisle to someone that your opponent also respects is a valuable way to bridge gaps and lead to less polarization. I also remember Romney and McCain being demonized but politics have changed drastically since over a decade ago now. I think that normalizing having respect for someone who was a good leader, even if you don’t agree with their stances, is something that has been lost and had been lost at the time. We want our leaders looking to the future and thinking of how they’ll be remembered. We want them to care about that to make better calls for the US as a whole.
>EDIT: After reading some comments, I just want to say, Democrats hated George HW Bush at the time. It's always weird to read retroactive fondness for people that were despised while in power.
I think we thought he'd be more of the same after Reagan, but he wasn't. The other thing is how moderate he appears in hindsight, with the GOP taking such far right turns ever since.
Personally, I don't recall Democrats hating HW, but they were wanting a new direction after 8 years of Reagan.
Yes. They compared Paul Ryan to Goebbels. Palin was kind of dreadful in retrospect, but before McCain picked her, she'd been treated very well by the media.
Libertarian so I'll go both.
For the GOP: Ike. I'd go Coolidge but Ike was honest, respectable, and did a lot of good.
Democrats: Clinton had a generally successful Presidency.
I'm a Reagan apologist. I understand Iran Contra. I understand the trouble with Reaganomics. But I also know that in 1980 we all just assumed we'd be nuked by Russia at some point - WWIII was inevitable. By 1990, we thought that we might not wind up glowing after all.
History suggests the USSR would have collapsed with or without Reagan. But I think it might have collapsed with a bang not a whimper if Reagan hadn't "befriended" Gorbachev.
Well, I'm too far left for the Democrats of my adulthood, so it's a false dichotomy. But if one classed me as a Democrat, I'd put Eisenhower as the last "good" GOP president. Yes, there was Operation Wetback and irradiating indigenous people. But there was high taxes on the rich, massive infrastructure investment, raising minimum wages, and strong unions.
>Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt, a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid
- Dwight Eisenhower
I am not a member of either party but…
I am pretty happy with all of the Presidents that I can remember and discuss (so, my opinions cover 1980-2016), with the exception of G.W. Bush’s first term. I thought that he was much better during his second term — I really hate that he invaded Iraq from both a liberal (anti-war) and conservative (not worth the financial cost) perspective. I’m probably not a huge fan of a lot of what Reagan did in hindsight, but it made more sense at the time given the high inflation and other issues that arose during the mid/late 1970s. I’m not a huge fan of Clinton the person, but I thought he did his job well while he was President.
Ike.
People are saying H.W. Bush, but I can't get on board with that, considering that he replaced Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court. (Granted, he also appointed Souter, who turned out to be just about as liberal as can be, but Bush knew what he was getting with Thomas, and the way that Thomas destroyed Marshall's legacy makes me say that he wasn't a "good" president.)
At the end of the day, HW was a leader above being a Republican. He was results-oriented and despised inaction. I’d love to have a government that actually does something again.
I wouldn’t necessarily have said this at the time. And his flaws were legion. But from a policy standpoint Bill Clinton looks better and better with the passage of time.
Bill Clinton
He is the kind of moderate Democrat that could still win my vote and things were really good during his presidency. The Democrat party has changed so much since then that it doesn’t feel like the Bill Clinton of the 90s would even be accepted in the modern Democrat party; he would probably be labeled a DINO by the standards of the modern Democrat party.
And before him, JFK is my favorite president ever. He was also pretty moderate compared to the standards of the modern Democrat party.
T.R. or Ike I think. I don’t vibe with second half of 20th century republican politics. And TR is almost a cheat because the way the parties worked then, he was ideologically much closer to a Democrat of the 70s than any kind of post re-alignment republican. So I guess Eisenhower then!
Kennedy
(Edit: to be clear - I don’t not like the GOP either. I’m a libertarian forced to choose between a radicalized Democratic Party and feckless, dithering GOP milquetoast.)
Eisenhower **hated** McCarthy. **Hated**. But he dealt with him in a more subtle manner.
Eisenhower learned a lot from his experience as Supreme Allied Commander. He played the long game.
Independent here, so I goes I’ll do both:
Democratic Party: Obama. He knew how to president without being old. I’m also biased because I grew up during his presidency
GOP: Dubya. Controversial pick yes but he wasn’t an insurrectionist or traitor.
Clinton.
I go back and forth on Obama. He wasn’t a bad president in my opinion but I feel like he had both the qualities I don’t like about Republicans and what I don’t like about Democrats wrapped into one. I still think I prefer Romney in 2012 in hindsight.
But Clinton 100% I would vote for, he was a good president.
I'm a libertarian so I'll answer both.
Republican: Coolidge. This might be a bit of a cop out as he is often pointed out as the most libertarian president but I stand by the answer. If I can't pick him then I gotta go all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt.
Democrat: Maybe JFK? Unfortunately he wasn't in office long but I think he tried to do some good things, like rein in the CIA (which probably led to his unfortunate presidential conclusion) and i think he handled the Cuban Missile Crisis well. I would say LBJ because he did do a lot of good things for civil rights but he also escalated the war in Vietnam significantly and was generally known as corrupt in his home state of Texas. My dad who was a kid when LBJ ran said Texans voted for him because they knew he was corrupt but he would be "corrupt for Texas".
I'm third party, but have voted Dem more recently less because of policy and more due to things I can't discuss.
In a vacuum:
GOP:
Ike
DEM:
Johnson, possibly Carter
I'm an independent now, used to be a Democrat.
Democrat is tough for me, maybe I hold them to a higher standard, but I would say JFK (would say Clinton but I was a D during his presidency and working in DC for DNC so he wasn't the opposite party.
Republican - HW Bush, very knowledgeable and respectable leader who was actually very moderate.
I’m neither (I support a separate Progressive Party), so…
Dems - JFK
Republicans - Eisenhower was good domestically although his foreign policy was quite dickish
That’s hard, I don’t even like most of the members of the party I’m closest to. In some ways I didn’t mind HW Bush, but I find it weird that so many on this sub talk about how he was great and Reagan was the devil when they were very similar in a lot of ways. I don’t have the same animosity for HW as I do Reagan, but I never would have voted for him. Ford is another that I like in some ways and actively dislike in others, and he seemed well meaning and honest most of the time.
But when it comes down to it, the last Republican that I liked enough that they’d actually get my support was Einsenhower, at least when it comes to presidential candidates.
Conservative born during Clinton's second term so I can't really give a good answer but anecdotally conservatives in my family have great views of Clinton's time in office. Non president but liberals in my family have really positive views on McCain. Also, I've never really heard anything bad about Carter from people on either side who lived through his term. I'm not super knowledgeable on his presidency but I'd say he seems to be one of the most generally beloved presidents.
Bush Sr. and before that Eisenhower.
Thing is today's GOP is so far removed from Bush Jrs GOP that I'm not sure the GOP of today should even be called The Republican party.
JFK, the last real president IMO
Edit: Bill Clinton to, he was the last Democrat who truly cared about the working man and he was very charismatic. Hindsight would have been 20/20, because he became another globalist elite after his presidency so his wife could start her political career
How is HW getting a pass for Iran Contra?
We don't really believe that as VP (and former Director of the CIA) he knew nothing about it do we?
Especially not after he pardoned Ollie North and the rest of them.
Honestly I have more complaints about my own party lately, since the last good president we elected was George W Bush (who also had the worst luck becoming POTUS when he did - facing 2 unavoidable crises in the sum of 8 years).....
If I had to pick for the Dems it would probably be JFK, although Bill Clinton 'got better' after he lost the House and had to re-align himself....
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bush the elder. I believe he was probably the last Republican who really thought of the country as a whole and tried to do the best for the country as a whole.
[удалено]
HW left office in 1993. Fox News started in 1996.
Sure, but Rush was already going strong.
Good point
Also three years is a bit of a blink of the eye when we look at the three decades impact Fox has had on reshaping the GOP and America
No it was around during Bush Sr.’s time. Bush specifically tried to court Limbaugh listeners by inviting him to the White House in either 88 or 92.
George HW Bush, easily. Hell, I might even vote for someone like him if that’s the direction his party had taken.
Bush was a solid moderate. IIRC, he was even advised to become more right-wing because the Republicans felt he was TOO moderate.
He was alright, but I’m not a fan of the neo-con CIA/energy business spooks he surrounded himself with who became further entrenched in his sons administration
Agreed. He said, "I'm a Republican but I'm not nuts about it." Signed the ADA which was the biggest civil rights legislation since the 60's. Strengthened the original 60's civil rights bill. Great at foreign policy. Then mayor of Atlanta Andrew Young said, " With Bush, I always thought he gave a fair deal." Definitely the best repub potus of my lifetime.
I don't think I've ever put 2+2 together that he signed the ADA. That's incredible.
I work with adults that have disabilities, it would be a much worse situation if he didn't support it
Yeah, I’m a moderate Dem and there’s a good chance he could have convinced me to vote for him.
He was also the right man for the job at the time. Needed a strong figure for foreign policy during the end of the cold war.
Strong but also with some wisdom on when to be strong. His early work with reunified Germany did wonders for European stability. My guess is that his work did more good than Clinton or Reagan could have done in that area at that time.
Someone who worked for the HW Bush Administration came to talk to us in college at the request of a friend (our professor). He came to talk about his career in finance, but he of course shared a few things about the Former President. HW Bush personally hand wrote birthday cards to all his employees and also sent Christmas cards to EVERYONE. And he loved receiving them as well! Talk about a classy man.
He was famous for writing notes. It's one of the secrets of his power. Before Reagan picked him, his highest elected office was in the House of Representatives. But he got appointed to an *amazing* string of offices after that.
Agreed, arguably the best resume of any modern president: 1. Naval officer during WWII. 2. Member of the House of Representatives, 1967-71. 3. Ambassador to the United Nations, 1971-73. 4. Chief of the Liaison Office to the PRC, 1974-75. 5. Director of Central Intelligence, 1976-77. 6. VP, 1981-89. 7. And of course, POTUS, 1989-1993.
Plus RNC chair.
Came here to say the same thing. Last sensible, rational, and civic-minded Republican president.
I was a baby during HW’s presidency. What are some things that you liked about him?
He had a sense of decency. I’d vote for him just because of that. Look up 1992 presidential debates on YT.
I know the brainrots got to me when I read this as "presidential debates on white"
If you look at all the elections in my life: Clinton vs HW Bush Clinton vs Dole W Bush vs Gore W Bush vs Kerry Obama vs McCain Obama vs Romney HRC ... I'd vote for anyone on either side of this list if it was an option this time.
Yeah. I'm not big on Romney it Kerry but I think both of them had a genuine since of wanting to do what's best for the country as they saw it. Also, that McCain vs Obama race. Wow. We didn't realize how good we had it. Wish he'd picked Lieberman as his running mate. Might have changed the way we talk about politics.
McCain walked the walk. I really admired him despite his choosing the mad Alaskan as a VP.
Kerry floated the idea of picking McCain as his running mate but McCain nixed it
We used to have a two party system in which qualifications, temperament, and intelligence were valued by both sides. You didn't have to fear that the wrong guy winning would literally destroy the country, it would just be frustrating for a while. I miss that time.
Completely agree. Any of those would be better than our current choices.
HW for sure!
Same here on HW. And from what I've heard, Eisenhower was evidently the pinnacle of Republican POTUS according to my Boomer Republican friend. Pro education and infrastructure. So two good ones in the last 60 years I guess.
Amazing.that his son Dubya was such a tool.
They say talent skips a generation.
I’m think the correct word would be-inevitable.
My one quarrel with him is Clarence Thomas
This is the way. I was going to say Ike but you had a better answer.
Yup. Lots of people like to talk a big game about Nixon, Eisenhower and Reagan, but I think HW actually had a moral backbone *and* knew to put country over ideology. Every bad thing you can say about him is also something you can say about one or more of the others, and I honestly kinda like him better than Clinton speaking as someone whose closest presidential candidate to his own politics was Debs.
We had a war, got out before getting stuck there, he raised taxes to pay for said war, and now modern republicans hate him for it.
Came here to say this, and I wasn't even alive yet
Co-sign. Certainty didn’t agree with him on lots of things, but he was a decent man and a life-long public servant.
I like this
Imo i feel we missed out on giving him a seocnd term. If feel we’d be better off hed won in 1992. I feel both parties would be better off.
Did what needed to be done, and was voted out for it
He deserved a second term. Anyone willing to do something unpopular for the true good of the country is a real leader. I’m glad his reputation has been rising at least.
Buchanan’s challenge from the right fatally weakened his chances. Perot didn’t help, but drew as many votes from Clinton as he did from Bush.
H.W. jumpstarted the large scale climate change denial in the GOP.
Compared to what we are seeing now, the worst thing he did is appoint Clarence Fucking Thomas.
This was my answer
My first thought was Ford, but you're right.
I completely agree. I would’ve voted for Bush over Clinton in 1992 if I was voting age or alive at all.
Eisenhower. A lot of people talk about Reagan shaping a generation of Republicans, but I’d say those children born in the 50s/60s were taught about Republicanism by parents who supported Eisenhower.
Say what you want about Reagan but that man got shit done. He was an incredibly pragmatic president and a legendary orator
Eisenhower, dude was willing to praise FDR and the new deal for preventing the US from descending to communism or fascism. Modern day republicans refuse to give FDR any credit.
Eisenhower was the Clinton of his time. Had to reverse his stances because he was in the wrong era.
Eisenhower was the establishment moderate candidate that prevented a conservative like Robert Taft from getting the nomination. The conservatives would have their revenge in 64 and would birth the modern conservative movement in the process. Eisenhower was solid. Not that great on civil rights (but no one really was -even Kennedy- aside from Truman and LBJ).
Truman desegregated the military but did little else. That’s a solid step, but I’d hardly call him “great” on civil rights.
I’d say it’s one step above a very low bar.
That’s a great way to put it
When a party loses three or more elections in a row, that generally signals to them that they need to change some positions.
Begrudgingly spent loads of public money on a massive infrastructure gig that fundamentally changed American commerce. 10/10
HW ADA was/is a great piece of legislation that helped a lot of people that society otherwise neglected
George Washington
Ah, an anti-federalist I see
As a person who agrees with the General about political parties, this is a great answer.
LBJ all the way. Carter is a wonderful human being, but he wasn't a great president Clinton was charming, played some good politics but there was always something uncomfortably slimy about him. President Obama wasn't candidate Obama who I supported. His expansions of the NSA surveillance, expansion of the drone war and extrajudicial murder of American citizens (Even if they were terrorists) rubbed me the wrong way.
A conservative that hates the NSA and drone warfare, do you actually believe in limited government? Mad props my dude!
Generally I believe in minding your own business and don't impede on the people with gross over-governance. When I was a teen I was watching in horror with what Bush II started with the birth of drone warfare and the Patriot act. Obama seemed to be against it so I was with him when I could vote. I'm old enough now to understand why Bush and his boys did what he did in the shadow of 9/11 (I don't like it, but I get the fog of war), but the expansion under Obama felt dystopian to me at the time at least and the drone programs high body count of innocent people was just mind numbing. To me the Democratic Party stopped being the Democrats and started being Obama's party where everyone followed his cues and I didn't like the example he became during his 8 years in office. I won't throw anymore stones, I absolutely hate the state of my party as well.
I’m very much a liberal leaning person, but I respect your standing on the principle of limited government. If more republicans were like you, I may actually support them.
Ironically democrats have smaller government intervention these days
I think I still preferred Obama for some of the domestic decisions over Bush or Romney, but his handling of the Middle East is a little sickening. I kind of wish McCain had won simply because I believe he would have pulled us out before stuff went so much further south.
"Govern wisely and as little as possible." - Sam Houston
Conservatives simply don’t believe in limited government. They believe in conserving and preserving the values and government formation of the past. This is why it’s not contradictory for conservatives to support gun rights and oppose abortion. Society’s fundamental formation changes with the ability to counteract a pregnancy. Conservatives don’t like the trends that occur. Liberals do.
I think what you're saying is fair to what the party has become, but it isn't aligned with what many genuine conservatives believe. Gun rights, abortion rights, marriage rights, lots of other hot-button issues, traditional conservatives who favor limited government don't see them as issues in a federal election because the federal government shouldn't be making decisions on those issues. The government has injected itself into all kinds of things, and both parties leverage that involvement to try and motivate votes, when in reality much of what the federal government is doing is really outside of what they should be doing at the federal level.
I mean, they can say they believe in those things, but if they vote for a republicans, they don’t actually support those ideals in any meaningful way.
LBJ was pretty slimy too tbh.
They're almost all slimy in some way. It all about what level of slimy you're comfortable with. I'd have to go back to maybe Truman if I didn't pick LBJ and I didn't want to do democrats dirty (Although you'd probably be happy with that judging on the flair.)
I don't have a party, and in some ways, both parties are opposite me. The last time I identified with a party and still liked the president was Reagan. Not a fan of Bush the Elder, and I was a Democrat when Clinton was president. Haven't really thought anyone in this century was a good president. EDIT: After reading some comments, I just want to say, Democrats *hated* George HW Bush at the time. It's always weird to read retroactive fondness for people that were despised while in power.
As another president who was hated in their time once said, “You have to wait for the dust to settle.” That was Harry Truman, a man who left office with the lowest approval rating of any president that has been tracked… who is now seen as one of the greatest of all time. I think hindsight has been very kind to HW and that’s not a bad thing. It takes a good leader to do the right thing even if people will hate you for it at the time.
I understand that point and appreciate it, but... Have you noticed that appreciation for presidents like Bush Sr and Reagan is always couched in a critique of the contemporary GOP? "Unlike these terrible hateful monsters today, the GOP used to be made up of good men who...." I suppose I never buy it, because it doesn't chime with what I saw at the time. It's hard to express exactly what I think is happening, but I think it's something like the idea that retroactive fondness is mostly just a way of expressing what is always being expressed, which is hatred right now. If someone says "I actually loved the Democratic Party when it had good men like Kennedy and LBJ, unlike the socialists and degenerates it runs for office today," it's really just a way of hating on the party today. That guy probably hated Kennedy and JFK, too, and with just as much vitriol.
I’ll admit, my like of HW does contain some of that too. But I don’t necessarily think that’s a bad thing. Politics does not always need to be toxic and praising a good president who your views don’t match up to should be a good thing. It shows the other side (whichever they may be) what qualities even folks who don’t agree with them policy-wise would want to vote for. If that’s a critique of current politics on either side of the aisle isn’t that a much better way to discuss it than partisan flame wars? It allows us to hold the present to the standards of the past, specifically when it comes to our standard bearers wanting to leave positive legacies as well.
I suppose that's true. I agree politics need not always be toxic. My concern is that this kind of retroactive affection IS toxic, a kind of backhanded attack on people now by comparing them to people in the past who no longer represent a threat. Even Romney and McCain were demonized. So to me, I find the comparisons between them and more recent figures somewhat disingenuous. I think it's one of those cases of the longer you live, the more you realize that the past won't be remembered as it really was.
I think we’re just gonna disagree on that then. I think wanting a respectable leader and being able to point across the aisle to someone that your opponent also respects is a valuable way to bridge gaps and lead to less polarization. I also remember Romney and McCain being demonized but politics have changed drastically since over a decade ago now. I think that normalizing having respect for someone who was a good leader, even if you don’t agree with their stances, is something that has been lost and had been lost at the time. We want our leaders looking to the future and thinking of how they’ll be remembered. We want them to care about that to make better calls for the US as a whole.
Republicans hated Kennedy when he was president now they pretend he would be one today so that goes both ways
Sometimes you have to let the dust settle and history and time changes opinions.
>EDIT: After reading some comments, I just want to say, Democrats hated George HW Bush at the time. It's always weird to read retroactive fondness for people that were despised while in power. I think we thought he'd be more of the same after Reagan, but he wasn't. The other thing is how moderate he appears in hindsight, with the GOP taking such far right turns ever since. Personally, I don't recall Democrats hating HW, but they were wanting a new direction after 8 years of Reagan.
The "in hindsight" thing I addressed elsewhere in the thread. I just think that makes the whole thing even less believable.
Yeah. Remember the days when Democrats were terrified of Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin was considered over the line unhinged?
Yes. They compared Paul Ryan to Goebbels. Palin was kind of dreadful in retrospect, but before McCain picked her, she'd been treated very well by the media.
To be fair Palin *was* very unqualified for the job. That particular criticism hasn’t aged all that poorly.
Bush the elder for his skillful use of diplomacy with the Soviets and his assembly of a coalition to fight Iraq after their invasion of Kuwait
I don't support either so I'll give both. George HW Bush for the Republicans and Obama for the Democrats.
The best answer for the modern era of politics.
Libertarian so I'll go both. For the GOP: Ike. I'd go Coolidge but Ike was honest, respectable, and did a lot of good. Democrats: Clinton had a generally successful Presidency.
Digging the HW Bush love on here 🥰
I'm a Reagan apologist. I understand Iran Contra. I understand the trouble with Reaganomics. But I also know that in 1980 we all just assumed we'd be nuked by Russia at some point - WWIII was inevitable. By 1990, we thought that we might not wind up glowing after all. History suggests the USSR would have collapsed with or without Reagan. But I think it might have collapsed with a bang not a whimper if Reagan hadn't "befriended" Gorbachev.
Well, I'm too far left for the Democrats of my adulthood, so it's a false dichotomy. But if one classed me as a Democrat, I'd put Eisenhower as the last "good" GOP president. Yes, there was Operation Wetback and irradiating indigenous people. But there was high taxes on the rich, massive infrastructure investment, raising minimum wages, and strong unions.
>Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt, a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid - Dwight Eisenhower
Sadly, stupid had become far more popular than he could have ever predicted.
Ouch.
Diss tracks in the 50s. "Their number is negligible and they are stupid" is just too good
>Yes, there was Operation Wetback and irradiating indigenous people. Don't forget about the banana republics!
I am not a member of either party but… I am pretty happy with all of the Presidents that I can remember and discuss (so, my opinions cover 1980-2016), with the exception of G.W. Bush’s first term. I thought that he was much better during his second term — I really hate that he invaded Iraq from both a liberal (anti-war) and conservative (not worth the financial cost) perspective. I’m probably not a huge fan of a lot of what Reagan did in hindsight, but it made more sense at the time given the high inflation and other issues that arose during the mid/late 1970s. I’m not a huge fan of Clinton the person, but I thought he did his job well while he was President.
HW Bush. Great guys with great integrity!
George HW Bush
GHWB. Though I suspect Eisenhower and Kennedy (?) will be the top two answers but I am willing to be surprised.
Lincoln.
I feel then youd have some respect for Teddy then too, without having to go that far back?
That fair (I was mostly being glib); in reality I'd probably say Ike.
Republican: Ike Democrat: LBJ Though both were great domestically, their foreign policies were pretty bad.
Ike. People are saying H.W. Bush, but I can't get on board with that, considering that he replaced Thurgood Marshall with Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court. (Granted, he also appointed Souter, who turned out to be just about as liberal as can be, but Bush knew what he was getting with Thomas, and the way that Thomas destroyed Marshall's legacy makes me say that he wasn't a "good" president.)
I've never been a Whig, but William Henry Harrison's presidency was ok. Not much bad happened while he was POTUS.
At the end of the day, HW was a leader above being a Republican. He was results-oriented and despised inaction. I’d love to have a government that actually does something again.
JFK I loved that man And Bobby, too
I wouldn’t necessarily have said this at the time. And his flaws were legion. But from a policy standpoint Bill Clinton looks better and better with the passage of time.
Bill Clinton. I'd kill for a Democrat like him today.
Jimmy Carter
JFK
John Kennedy.
My answer would violate rule 3. I lean right.
Bill Clinton He is the kind of moderate Democrat that could still win my vote and things were really good during his presidency. The Democrat party has changed so much since then that it doesn’t feel like the Bill Clinton of the 90s would even be accepted in the modern Democrat party; he would probably be labeled a DINO by the standards of the modern Democrat party. And before him, JFK is my favorite president ever. He was also pretty moderate compared to the standards of the modern Democrat party.
T.R. or Ike I think. I don’t vibe with second half of 20th century republican politics. And TR is almost a cheat because the way the parties worked then, he was ideologically much closer to a Democrat of the 70s than any kind of post re-alignment republican. So I guess Eisenhower then!
Eisenhower, with Bush 1 barely falling below the threshold.
Eisenhower.
Eisenhower, and it's not even close.
Eisenhower
Ike
Abraham Lincoln for the Republicans
Eisenhower.
Kennedy (Edit: to be clear - I don’t not like the GOP either. I’m a libertarian forced to choose between a radicalized Democratic Party and feckless, dithering GOP milquetoast.)
I’m independent but imo for republicans Eisenhower democrats idk
TR Poverty rate grew to 30% by the time Ike left office. He also failed to come out and condemn McCarthy’s red baiting.
Eisenhower **hated** McCarthy. **Hated**. But he dealt with him in a more subtle manner. Eisenhower learned a lot from his experience as Supreme Allied Commander. He played the long game.
George W. Bush
Mesyush is a democrat? Wild
Couldn't be anything else.
A Democrat that stans Cheney, I’ve seen it all
Finding a republican that likes Cheney is close to impossible.
Are you… Are you me? I voted for Dick Cheney twice. Registered Democrat.
Independent here, so I goes I’ll do both: Democratic Party: Obama. He knew how to president without being old. I’m also biased because I grew up during his presidency GOP: Dubya. Controversial pick yes but he wasn’t an insurrectionist or traitor.
Clinton. I go back and forth on Obama. He wasn’t a bad president in my opinion but I feel like he had both the qualities I don’t like about Republicans and what I don’t like about Democrats wrapped into one. I still think I prefer Romney in 2012 in hindsight. But Clinton 100% I would vote for, he was a good president.
I'm a libertarian so I'll answer both. Republican: Coolidge. This might be a bit of a cop out as he is often pointed out as the most libertarian president but I stand by the answer. If I can't pick him then I gotta go all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt. Democrat: Maybe JFK? Unfortunately he wasn't in office long but I think he tried to do some good things, like rein in the CIA (which probably led to his unfortunate presidential conclusion) and i think he handled the Cuban Missile Crisis well. I would say LBJ because he did do a lot of good things for civil rights but he also escalated the war in Vietnam significantly and was generally known as corrupt in his home state of Texas. My dad who was a kid when LBJ ran said Texans voted for him because they knew he was corrupt but he would be "corrupt for Texas".
No Ike? Bush Sr?
Grover Cleveland.
HW Bush.
I'm third party, but have voted Dem more recently less because of policy and more due to things I can't discuss. In a vacuum: GOP: Ike DEM: Johnson, possibly Carter
I'm an independent now, used to be a Democrat. Democrat is tough for me, maybe I hold them to a higher standard, but I would say JFK (would say Clinton but I was a D during his presidency and working in DC for DNC so he wasn't the opposite party. Republican - HW Bush, very knowledgeable and respectable leader who was actually very moderate.
I’m neither (I support a separate Progressive Party), so… Dems - JFK Republicans - Eisenhower was good domestically although his foreign policy was quite dickish
JFK...
Uh….hm. William Howard Taft?
Uh….hm. William Howard Taft?
Eisenhower, though the Bushes come in tied for 2nd.
That’s hard, I don’t even like most of the members of the party I’m closest to. In some ways I didn’t mind HW Bush, but I find it weird that so many on this sub talk about how he was great and Reagan was the devil when they were very similar in a lot of ways. I don’t have the same animosity for HW as I do Reagan, but I never would have voted for him. Ford is another that I like in some ways and actively dislike in others, and he seemed well meaning and honest most of the time. But when it comes down to it, the last Republican that I liked enough that they’d actually get my support was Einsenhower, at least when it comes to presidential candidates.
George HW Bush and Richard Nixon.
Eisenhower
I mean I’m an independent but I lean more Democratic. I’d say while Bush was high C tier, I have Reagan in mid B tier so my choice is Ronald Reagan
HW
H.W. or Eisenhower
Eisenhower tbh
JFK.
I am not really a democrat or a republican but for the Republicans H.W, and for the Democrats I'd say Clinton were their last good presidents.
Clinton had major flaws but I think he steered the ship pretty well during the 1990s.
Bill Clinton was the last democrat that worked with republicans.
I like George W. Bush on a personal level (though he wasn’t an effective President overall) and likely would have voted for him in ‘04.
Eisenhower.
I'm a registered Independent so ... Obama & Reagan
Ike
Bush Sr probably
LBJ
Bush Snr Obama
President Truman.
Conservative born during Clinton's second term so I can't really give a good answer but anecdotally conservatives in my family have great views of Clinton's time in office. Non president but liberals in my family have really positive views on McCain. Also, I've never really heard anything bad about Carter from people on either side who lived through his term. I'm not super knowledgeable on his presidency but I'd say he seems to be one of the most generally beloved presidents.
Eisenhower.
Easy, Clinton. Before him? Truman. Before him? N/A.
Bush Sr. and before that Eisenhower. Thing is today's GOP is so far removed from Bush Jrs GOP that I'm not sure the GOP of today should even be called The Republican party.
Abe
Eisenhower
JFK
Eisenhower
Bush Sr in the US, I'm an NDP supporter in Canada so all of the other guys are corporate scumbags...
What’s the opposite of Anti-Masonic Party?
Eisenhower, but where he alive today he'd be a member of my party.
JFK, the last real president IMO Edit: Bill Clinton to, he was the last Democrat who truly cared about the working man and he was very charismatic. Hindsight would have been 20/20, because he became another globalist elite after his presidency so his wife could start her political career
Upon review, Clinton perhaps? But for the Democrats, I’d really have to go back to JFK.
Eisenhower.
Eisenhower, politically, but H.W., as a person.
John F. Kennedy
O
Harry Truman
I’m not in any party but I tend to lean right so I’ll name the last good Democrat: John F Kennedy.
Carter. Everyone else have become grifters or were grifters.
Eisenhower
Abe Lincoln was okay
Grant
How is HW getting a pass for Iran Contra? We don't really believe that as VP (and former Director of the CIA) he knew nothing about it do we? Especially not after he pardoned Ollie North and the rest of them.
Honestly I have more complaints about my own party lately, since the last good president we elected was George W Bush (who also had the worst luck becoming POTUS when he did - facing 2 unavoidable crises in the sum of 8 years)..... If I had to pick for the Dems it would probably be JFK, although Bill Clinton 'got better' after he lost the House and had to re-align himself....
Andrew Jackson