Hey old timers, has there ever been another president this disappointing?

[XemaSab]

I think a lot of up would be less bummed out by Obama if we hadn't gotten our hopes up that he would be a transformative president.

Have there been any other presidents that were this DEPRESSING?

I mean, Nixon was a scum, Reagan was a creep, and so forth, but I would imagine that most people here never expected them to be good presidents in the first place.

I'm talking like FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, or Clinton.

Thanks in advance.

[LaurenG]

1. Maybe but I can't be sure since I may have not been paying attention

:shrug:

edit: typo or some grammatical error or something

[tblue]

2. No. On a 1-10 scale, I hoped for an 8, expected a 6, and got a 2.

Biggest political disappointment of my life.

[Shagbark Hickory]

3. some would say carter but he didnt run on 'hope n change'

[Whisp]

4. matter of opinion. I think Obama is doing a wonderful job

considering all the ankle biters he has on him constantly.

Best President Ever
and no huge big assed ego either

[TheDebbieDee]

54. Agreed. You're talking good sense, Whisp!

[coalition_unwilling]

90. Oh please. You can't seriously maintain that Obama is better

than, say, Lincoln or FDR.

[Angry Dragon]

............

:popcorn:


I can not see where he has moved the country forward
A President that was the best President ever would not appear this way
I feel history will not be kind to him, it will treat him fairly, but he will not look good in the end unless he changes direction

[itsrobert]

5. I'm not one to defend Obama but...

Osama GONE
Qadaffi Gone
Mobarrek Gone
Dont Ask Dont Tell Going, Going
Many other successes.

Start focusing on the positive.

[immoderate]

36. But he always seems to do things that rich people like.

Nothing else.

--imm

[elehhhhna]

41. sounds like a good SOS

[Tx4obama]

6. Unrec'd due to unnecessary negativity towards a sitting democratic president. n/t

[RC]

19. Re rec's because Obama ran as a Democrat and Presidents as a Center-Right Republican.

[Scurrilous]

7. He's worse than Hitler! n/t

[grantcart]

33. You always exaggerate

He's more in line with Mussolini.

[Scurrilous]

38. LOL

:hi:

[SwampG8r]

93. that made me laugh

[marlakay]

8. Loved Carter but everyone wanted him to be stronger like

we all want Obama to be stronger. Everyone thought Carter was weak and too nice...sound familiar???

At least Carter really tried to change things environmentally. The media really screwed Carter over too...

And when Ford took over for Nixon no one was happy about it and we couldn't wait for next election.

[RebelOne]

57. Liked Carter until he allowed all the Mariel boat lift people

in to Miami. I lived there at the time and our crime rate soared after they hit the shores of South Florida. That's because Castro opened all the prisons in Cuba and sent the criminals to us.

[Go2Peace]

64. Miles between Carter and President Obama. Carter was seen as weak

but his views were much more liberal.

[XemaSab]

83. Word

n/t

[stevedeshazer]

9. I was more disappointed in Bill Clinton.

Those trade agreements passed fifteen years ago are still killing the U.S. economy. That wasn't Barack Obama's fault.

[TheKentuckian]

12. It would be terribly hard to be surprised, being a Governor gives one a hell of a track record

Bubba was quite "business friendly" and his policies weren't a shock.

[stevedeshazer]

20. Well, I voted for him

Given the choices I had.

Pappy Bush? Ross Perot?

So I voted for BC, and by the '96 election, I was disillusioned. But not delusional so as to vote for Bob Dole.

I'm in the same place right now with this President.

[WCGreen]

95. I think Clinton was more disappointing because he pretty much

said to the Unions you have to back me cause I am all you got and then he springs NAFTA. He also brought in all those Treasury folks who were more interested in helping Wall Street and totally forgot about main street.

When I ran as a Democrat in 1994 for the Ohio State House, the Unions were up in arms about NAFTA and they took it out on the rest of the democrats.

That was when the DLC took over as the main lobby/money raising organization and pretty much cut the Unions out.

That's what really disappointed me. More than anything else.

With president Obama, well, he was handed a pile of shit to deal with and so his agenda was redefined before he even won the election.

[EFerrari]

56. Deregulation, NAFTA, welfare deform.

I was a single mom in grad school and didn't pay as close attention. Now, I'm glad I didn't.

[stevedeshazer]

66. I was a young dad making good money and benefits.

My wife, even better.

Fifteen years later and thinking about retirement, I think as strongly as ever that Bill Clinton was wrong.

Now my kids are adults. They have plenty of college and work experience, but I'm not sure it's going to help them much at all.

Now, at 56, I can't even get a decent job.

Make no mistake, I've had a crappy job for almost six years and I'm glad, making half what I did in 2000.

[EFerrari]

80. Right there with you and about the same age.

I've been subsisting on what amounts to piece work. One of my sons went back to school and became an EMT. I don't know how that's going for him but if my job prospects weren't great under Carter, theirs are awful under Obama.

[proud patriot]

10. Clinton disappointed me to same degree

:shrug:

[A-Schwarzenegger]

11. Older I get, lower my prezpectations go.

:*

[JohnnyLib2]

15. Hey, great minds.....

:hi:

(reply 13)

[A-Schwarzenegger]

58. ... are disappointed alike.

:)

[JohnnyLib2]

13. The more presidents I watch, the more I lower expectations.

There's been some of this reaction with all of them, but communication is quicker and louder now. I think his sudden popularity in 2008 was a runaway truck........crash!

[GKirk]

14. Presidents are like one night stands...

...they seem like a good idea at the time and then you wake up...

[Pyrzqxgl]

16. Well

Johnson had that Viet Nam war, Carter was a better ex President, Clinton was a little to close to the DLC and a horndog to boot, Truman thought his daughter could sing & tended to call folks who didn't names, FDR & Kennedy were
golden eras for Democrats (if they were horndogs too, at least they didn't get caught). Eisenhower & Ford today
probably wouldn't be Republicans (at least not Republican's like they are now). I'm not sure Nixon would be (he was just a gangster in the guise of a politician). I don't know about Wilson or Grover Cleveland.

[panader0]

17. I'm 60, does that make me an old timer?

I didn't go through FDR or Truman (who dropped the A-bomb), but Kennedy and Johnson were the Nam Presidents (with Nixon).
Carter, while I liked him, was ineffective, and had the hostage crisis thing. Clinton benefitted hugely from the tech growth market.
And the NAFTA thing happened with Bill. Oh yeah, the BJ embarrassment.
So yeah, I have been disappointed by Democratic presidents many times.
But I always vote for the Dems, party line, (with a few indies).
I would challenge any DUer who bashes Obama constantly to do better. There is much more going on than we are aware of.
Disappointed in Obama? Yes. But I will vote for him again.

[Davis_X_Machina]

18. All of them.

Property is still theft, and no one is expropriating the expropriators.

[in_cog_ni_to]

21. NO! Not a Democratic President. Obama is THE WORSE

so-called Democratic president in our history. He's no Democrat. he's made that perfectly clear.

[mitchtv]

134. +1... n/t

[Spider Jerusalem]

22. Clinton, as disappointing to the same people and for the same reasons

those reasons quite simply being that a lot of people on the left looked at him and fooled themselves into thinking he might actually be a liberal or progressive despite the absence of any evidence to support such a hypothesis.

[bhikkhu]

124. That's what I was thinking

...around '97 I just tuned out - it was too miserable listening to either side of the shitstorm. If politics is on the back-burner for most people, its because of that sort of thing - at some point, the misery level is too high and you just have to leave it and get on with your life.

[TheCowsCameHome]

23. I've reached the point at age 66

where I actually expect to be disappointed - some times more than others.

I'm disappointed in Barack Obama. I should know by now not to get my hopes up.

My heart aches for the future generations - they'll never know what a great president was.

[MineralMan]

24. Screw that. Unrecced

Seriously.

[KamaAina]

25. Kind of a loaded question

but I'll go with Carter, and for similar reasons: I was hoping he'd right the ship after the Reagan/Ford years, just like I was hoping O would after Bush**.

[tularetom]

26. Clinton - best republican president we ever had

Up until now that is.

I was 4 years old when FDR died so I can't say.

Didn't expect much from Carter so I wasn't disappointed.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Denninmi]

28. Well, honestly, yes, I am disappointed in Obama.

I was hoping for another FDR. I honestly don't know what to think of the man. I like him personally, but I don't know if his heart is truly with the average person. He may be a realist, in that what he does is the best he can do under the circumstances. I don't know, honestly, the entire political being of the nation seems dysfunctional at best, and nothing makes sense anymore.

BUT, BUT, BUT, he's a thousand times better than ANY alternative on the right, and he certainly won't face a significant primary challenge on the left. If for NO other reason than to try to protect upcoming Supreme Court appointments, I think we all need to do what we can to help his re-election effort.

[Wait Wut]

29. I'm not disappointed.

I was disappointed with Carter and Clinton. I wasn't around for the rest, although Johnson was elected on the day I was born. My parents HATED him. I do remember them speaking of FDR in glowing terms. Oh, and they were disappointed with Clinton and Carter, as well. They spoke kindly of Kennedy, but would say the man never got the chance to prove himself. I do think he was the main reason for my parents complete hatred of Johnson.

Our President has not "depressed" me. The GOP has.

[FarLeftFist]

30. Greatest President of my life, so far.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[XemaSab]

37. Word

n/t

[MineralMan]

40. -10. Worse than Nixon?

Screw that noise.

[mike_c]

45. I spent DECADES hating Nixon...

...but yes, I do believe Obama has been MUCH worse for the U.S. than Nixon was. Nixon's worst faults were personal, frankly. Yeah, I'd like Obama to be my uncle and I wouldn't piss on Nixon if his pants were ablaze, but that doesn't change the facts as I see them. The lynchpin of my distaste for Nixon-- other than his greasy sleaziness personally-- was his cynical manipulation of the Vietnam war. That alone is enough to condemn him to the worst hell that history has for shitbag war mongerers. But Obama scores little better on that front and a whole lot worse on lots of others.

You might not like that noise, but there it is. I'd rate Obama's administration worse than Nixon's, better than Reagan's. And WAY worse than another Republican president that I've come to admire somewhat in recent years-- Eisenhower.

[MineralMan]

46. Whatthefuckingever...

....

[coalition_unwilling]

94. Um, Nixon's worst faults were most certainly NOT PERSONAL (like, for example,

secretly bombing Cambodia).

I am highly disappointed in Obama but his conduct has not yet reached the standard of 'high crimes and misdemeanors' that Nixon's reached. Nor do I think Obama's conduct ever will.

I don't understand how you can say that Obama's admin is way worse than Eisenhower's. Aside from ending the Korean conflict and launching the interstate program, exactly what did Eisenhower do that makes you 'admire' him? Ike didn't even have the moral courage to kneecap McCarthy, even after McCarthy started gunning for his admin. That honor fell to the lowly Joseph Welch. Now there's someone I can admire :)

[scheming daemons]

32. In my lifetime: Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II have all been worse

Carter was definitely more disappointing.

[Go2Peace]

72. Our memory of Carter's Presidency has become distorted

He was the first president to get serious rewriting by the Republican machine as it ramped up. They annihilated his reputation.

His administration was the strongest environmental administration we have had. Despite Reagan and Bush almost killing the superfund, a lot of neighborhoods are far less toxic and families healthier because of it. If it wasn't for his administration we would have a lot less of our pristine wilds left. I believe more lands were set aside for preservation in his administration than in any other.

His human rights work was exemplerary and he gets far less credit for it than he should. His administration was much more critical in the fall of the Soviet Union than people want to give him credit for. That bumbling fool of agression Reagan did almost everything he could to get us into a serious conflict with the USSR. I believe that Carter's peace work and meetings with USSR leaders is what gave the Russians perspective that kept their paranoia down through that serious time.

Carter's work on Nuclear reduction (SALT treaties) was so significant it withstood heavy assault and (mostly) lasted through several agressive administrations. Again, this was instrumental in keeping nuclear war at bay, if only for what it represented.

Carter's energy policy was brilliant and way before his time. He should get much more serious credit. If it had not been sabotagued by the following administrations the US would be mountains ahead and the world a far less dangerous place. It's unfortunate we are too stubborn to recognize the genius of where he was trying to lead the US.

Unemployment was at 9% and inflation was already at 5.8% in 1976, it increased to 7.7% through 1978, but household income also grew 5%. It was the oil crisis and what was an unprecidented shortage and spike in prices that did his administration in. Oil doubled in price overnight, and because we still had fairly un-manipulated indicators (fairly honest numbers, unlike now), it was completely reflected in inflation numbers, which jacked to 13.8% by 1980. It was mostly oil shock that stopped the economy, there was no awareness of our dependence on oil and we used it without any consideration for interruptions or price changes.

Despite what happened on his "watch", Carter did a hell of a lot in only a few years (latter 1.5 years was pretty much dealing with the oil and hostage crisis right?).

If we take off the right wing spun glasses and really look at his tenure, it had some fairly phenominal components. If he had been re-elected I have no doubts that we would be living in a significantly different world.

[saras]

34. There have certainly been worse ones, but none with a cheering section like this.

The really depressing thing about Obama isn't even his corporate policies, it's how many Democrats defend them against traditional Democratic values, not to mention progressive ones.

[Joe Fields]

43. +23

[4now]

35. I am an old timer

I go back to Truman and Obama is the best president in my life time.
Who could even begin to compare?
Clinton, Carter or Johnson?
Don't make me laugh.
We just don't know how lucky we are that we have Obama.

[handmade34]

47. hey old timer

:hi:

[Pisces]

48. [phone]

[MineralMan]

51. +100.

Thanks, new person!

[WillyT]

61. Oh Yeah... We Are SO Fortunate For His Ability To Give Away The Store, Er... I Mean, Compromise...

:beer:

:smoke:

:boring:

[Number23]

88. I'm nowhere near an old timer (well, that's what I tell myself anyway)

and I love your post. Love your positivity, enthusiasm and smarts!

[coalition_unwilling]

96. Noticed you omitted JFK from your catalogue. During the 1960

campaign for the nomination, JFK called Coretta Scott King and spoke to her when her husband had been jailed for civil disobedience to protest Jim Crow. I've always been struck by the fundamental moral decency in that phone call by JFK -- he didn't have to do it and it may have cost him as many white votes as it gained him black ones -- and think it spoke volumes about JFK as a man and as a president.

[RFKHumphreyObama]

105. Welcome to DU 4Now

:thumbsup:

We need more like you. Great post:yourock:

[elehhhhna]

39. transformative, hell. I just wanted a DEMOCRAT.

[Bake]

74. Maybe he meant he was going to "transform" into a Republican.

Just sayin'.

Bake

[leftofcool]

42. Johnson was depressing due to Vietnam

He did some wonderful things but on this issue, he failed.

[Joe Fields]

44. No, there hasn't been, and it is doubly depressing because of

how much we really needed another FDR.

[Bonhomme Richard]

49. Carter then Clinton. No better, no worse. n/t

[Greybnk48]

71. Ditto. n/t

[Go2Peace]

75. See my post about the distortions done to Carter

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1821765&mesg_id=1822811

[Iggo]

50. Google "LBJ Viet Nam". (n/t)

[treestar]

52. No one was ever so obsessed with a President before

Or expecting so much.

It's getting past ridiculous and advantages Republicans (which makes me sure they are behind it).

[democrat2thecore]

59. What ?!?!

We were pretty obsessed with Bush around here. The nation has been obsessed with many presidents. How many hang portraits of the president in their living rooms anymore?

I think Obama has been the biggest disappointment for me personally. I was so excited with the nomination and election of President Obama. I've never seen a bigger disconnect between campaign rhetoric and job performance. I sometimes wonder if it's the same guy.

[Go2Peace]

78. It's all about his Campaign rhetoric. No other President so fully claimed as significant change of

course.

I don't think Pres. Obama has done all that well, not because he has not done some good things, but his approach and what he is *not* fighting for, are significant and critical.

He brought this criticism on himself. He won the Presidency by building up HUGE expectations, not by "policy talking points", but by allowing the rhetoric to lead people to believe he would make much more serious CHANGE than he has fought for.

Politics is somewhat theater, but people were very serious about the last election and they feel the consequence of doing things the same old way, will have larger repurcussions.

I don't know why people on OFA even spend so much energy here trying to knock down opinions, where most people have strongly held beliefs. It just causes much more conflict. If I felt so strongly about Obama, I would be going to other more moderate formats where more impresionable people hang?

[treestar]

86. Really why did you invest so much in that office?

One does not need to hang a portrait to be obsessed.

[democrat2thecore]

98. But my point was the opposite

One would have to be obsessed to hang a portrait and it's been said in this thread nobody has been obsessed with a president before. Which...truly...is ridiculous.

[wizstars]

125. I hung a portrait of Reagan.........on my dartboard.

By 1986, it was in total shreds!

[swilton]

53. After Bush the Wonder

we had thought that this new kid on the block would be transformative - he did run on hope and change...But it was all in our imaginations - no substance behind the image.

[hlthe2b]

55. Nixon was a crook, but as RETHUGS go, he was very progressive...

We wouldn't have EPA nor most of the regulations the RETHUG are desperate to dismantle without him.

When you look through a microscope at some limited aspect, they all look bad. But a more macro/comprehensive look at them (FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton... and hopefully Obama at the end of his Presidency)tells a very different story.

[democrat2thecore]

60. Nixon's Health Care plan makes Obama's look draconian -nt

[hlthe2b]

62. Absolutely...

sigh....

[alcibiades_mystery]

63. The Left hated Truman so much they actually did run a left-progressive candidate against him

To disastrous results, of course.

If you want to look at a President that sold out the Left, look at Truman. The entire left was destroyed by Truman's cowardly and quislingesque caving to the rabid anti-communists. The blacklists started with the Truman administrations cowardly approval. Once we get to that level of persecution sanctioned by a Democratic President, then some on the left here might have a point.

[Major Hogwash]

92. When was that?

"The blacklists started with the Truman administrations cowardly approval."

[democrat2thecore]

99. 1948 - The Progressive Party ran Henry Wallace against Truman. -nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

107. Name one thing the Truman administration did to oppose the red-baiting hysteria

Neither Truman nor the Democratic Party at the time did jack shit to oppose it. In the case of the investigations against government employees, they just shitcanned them. In the case of the persecution of entertainment workers and academics, the Truman administration said and did NOTHING to stop the Republican onslaught. It should be noted that the GOP strategy and charges hadn't changed very much since the late 1930's and early 1940's: McCarthy's committee strategy looked very much like the Rapp-Coudert Committee in New York State in the early 40's. What changed is that they were allowed to get out of hand by a cowardly administration caving completely to the GOP arguments. As is well-known, the broader phenomenon known as McCarthyism reigned supreme throughout Truman's presidency, and didn't begin to subside until it was well over.

Why? Did you know that late 1945 through 1946 saw some of the biggest strike waves the US has ever seen? That the late 1940's just before the Hollywood investigations began saw bitter struggles between the Hollywood unions and studios?

It was in this context that the notorious Taft-Hartley Act was passed. Truman could, of course, be considered brave for having vetoed Taft-Hartley (which was then passed when his veto was overridden by Congress with massive Democratic complicity), but he then used the bill's provisions over and over again.

I can't even imagine what the response to Truman's actions would be by some here, had we had a DU at the time.

[Major Hogwash]

108. When did the Korean War begin?

I still don't know what blacklist Truman was supposed to have.
Never heard he had one.

[alcibiades_mystery]

110. Oh for God's sake

The blacklists were not "had" by people in government. If you're so ignorant of the period that you don't understand what the blacklists were, or what the anti-communist investigation committees were, then we should simply stop having this conversation, and you should go read some books.

The argument is that the Truman administration did nothing to oppose the Republican-led anti-communist witch-hunts, with a debilitating (and probably permanent) effect on the American labor movement. The administration, in fact, went along with them both tacitly and openly.

[Major Hogwash]

111. You can't just blow smoke up my ass like that by simply making claims that way.

I asked a very simple, straight-forward question about your allegation concerning blacklists drawn up by Truman and his administration.
Since I have NEVER - as in, not ever - heard that before, I thought there was something that I didn't know about that period of time.

But, as it turns out, there's no there, there.

Eisenhower was the President in 1954, when McCarthy conducted his witch hunt against communists in the Army and the State Department.

[alcibiades_mystery]

112. Since I NEVER said that the Truman administration "drew up" a blacklist

(And I defy you to find where I said that), your question was ridiculous to begin with. I said they did nothing to stop either the purges or the blacklists, which is objectively true.

The anti-communist hearings started well before 1954. McCarthy's initial charges against the State Department came in 1950 (which, incidentally,was two years AFTER the HUAC accused Alger Hiss of espoionage). Your ignorance of the era is shocking. The purges of the State department started in the late-1940's, as did the Hollywood blacklists, which were instituted in Truman's FIRST term in office (in the fall of 1947, to be specific). The HUAC hearings against academics raged throughout the late 1940's and early 1950's, and had even subsided by the time of the Army-McCarthy hearings.

Are you even serious?

[Major Hogwash]

114. Yes, you did. Read your first post about blacklists, honey.

You're hysterical.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

65. "Hey, hey, LBJ. How many kids did you kill today?" And, he just kept on killing.

[blogslut]

67. Yes. All of them.

[mmonk]

68. No Democrat in my lifetime.

Eisenhower was president when I was born. Reagan's legacy is not having enough people fighting for the people and their welfare.

[jpak]

69. Yeah - Nixon, Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2

FYI

[Raine]

70. Well they promised me nothing so I expected nothing from them and they didn't disappoint.

I'm disappointed in Democrats who raise my expectations, make me hopeful, then do the same as repuke presidents. They ignore the average American in favor of the rich and powerful.

[democrat2thecore]

131. I agree completely. I think some missed the real question by ignoring the "expectations" part -nt

[Lil Missy]

73. Yes, several.

Nixon, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and Palin. Wait .. what??

[Le Taz Hot]

76. Not even close.

I've never actually lived under a Republican Democrat president before. Never want to again, either.

[Whisp]

77. yeh, the Chimperor was far less a dissapointment.

than Obama.

...............................

[montieg]

79. Campaigned HARD for Johnson in 64 mainly

because of that little girl/a-bomb ad. Though I am a fourth generation brass-collar, yellow-dog Democrat. Then went to the ground bloody twice two years later in anti-war actions. Though I was so stoned at the time it didn't hurt that much, as I remember. Best four years of my life. No doubt.

[aka-chmeee]

81. I would say Obama is the most disappointing Democratic

president in my lifetime...if I could just convince myself the s.o.b. is a democrat. As it is, I can't even think of him as a contender for best republican president, certainly comes in below Eisenhower and Nixon...Damned if I can see any appreciable difference between him and W. Nixon had his personal faults, but his paranoia, persecution complex, and proclivity to use profanity don't compare to Obama's prevarications and weakness as serious faults for a president imho.

[B Calm]

82. Boy you'd think we would be out of Iraq and Afghanistan by now. .

[Creideiki]

84. Buchanan. The first gay president pretty much sucked

and caused the conditions that led to the Civil War.

Of course, the second gay president kicked ass, so it's good. I'd rather be known as the minority that gets to claim Lincoln any day of the week.

[coalition_unwilling]

97. OMG, you seriously claim Buchanan 'caused the conditions

that led to the Civil War'? Buchanan didn't cause slavery. Get a grip.

[democrat2thecore]

100. You didn't ask ME, but...

For starters, just Google 'Buchanan' and 'Dred-Scott'. He was an absolutely horrible president.

[coalition_unwilling]

130. There is no doubt that Buchanan was a terrible president, but I

also think it is manifestly unfair and inappropriate to say he 'caused the conditions that led to the Civil War' as the original poster would have had it.

N.B. The Dred Scott decision was reached two days after Buchanan's inauguration in 1857. Means the case had been in the pipeline since the late 1840s, long before Buchanan had anything to do with it. If anything, Buchanan's attempts to sway the USSC so the case would not appear to have been decided upon purely sectional lines were attempts by Buchanan to kick the slavery can down the road. That's what I blame Buchanan for, for not being more firm and resolute. That's a far cry from saying, though, that Buchanan caused the conditions that led to the Civil War. I think we should direct our attentions a bit further south of D.C. if we're looking for the causes of said conditions :)

[Creideiki]

133. Slavery is in itself only a partial cause. Buchanan was ineffectual in dealing with an extremely

polarized political circumstances which led to extremists seceding.

[coalition_unwilling]

138. Slavery is the 'sine qua non' of the U.S. Civil War. Without slavery,

there would have been no need for a civil war to resolve sectional disputes - there would have been no need for Southerners to insist on a 'defense of our state from invaders,' nor would there have been any need for the federal government to suppress the traitors.

Saying Buchanan was 'ineffectual,' while true, is hardly the same as saying that he 'caused the conditions' that led to the Civil War.

[Creideiki]

139. Unless you got at least a B in history.

Hey. I got a good public school education. We covered this stuff. Sorry you didn't.

[moondust]

85. Circumstances

beyond his control have been particularly bad for Obama from day one: two wars, collapsing economy, high unemployment after a decade of stagnation, huge unfunded tax cuts in place, record filibusters followed by an intransigent Republican House all but bringing Congress to a standstill, et al. Add to all that the vile undertow of racism and Teahadists.


Pulitzer-prize winning Historian David McCullough on Fareed Zakaria GPS, 7/24/11:

“I admire him very much,” McCullough said of Obama. “His time in office presented him with problems such as very few presidents have ever had to address. And given the complexity and the gravity of those problems, I think he’s handled himself very well. My hat goes off to him, my heart goes out to him.”

.

[Marrah_G]

87. I am kicking myself for actually hoping he was going to do great things

Great liberal things, not great conservative things. I knew better, but damn I really did start to believe. I think that has alot to do with my current seething anger at both him and the party. They could have done great things. Instead they chose to continue making themselves and their donors more wealthy.I feel used and punked and frankly if there was a mob with torches and pitchforks headed towards DC I would join them.

[Bluebear]

104. We were sold a bill of goods

[JDPriestly]

89. Carter was not re-elected -- after grievously disappointing progressives

and, of course, never building a strong enough base in the center.

It's a shame. He is a wonderful person.

[SwampG8r]

91. i am starting to lean in the direction of

if we send him good legislation he will enact it
this is finally being discussed on DU in a more than "did so" did not" kind of way
if we want progressive results we need to send progressive legislators
we need to make sure we put progressive asses in the seats
we need to hold the fire to the ones in office now
and we need to pressure the ones in that are not working with us at this time
i dont think he would pass on many progressive policies if they actually were to cross his desk

as to the OP i have to say ford was
first day pardoned nixon
since then no law is safe from a president

[Angry Dragon]

101. your nixon pardon view is spot on ...........

:fistbump:

[SwampG8r]

119. thanks

i wonder how many of DU are either too young or too fact deprived to know how we ended up here
it was a different course until tricky dick
we were actually making progress in a progressive sense
when ford folded is the moment it changed
ford always said it was the best thing for america i always thought it was the best thing for the american political class
but not for america
we would have been better served to rip that pustule open and let sunlight sanitize it

[LuvNewcastle]

102. They've all been horrible.

Nixon was President when I was born and since then there's only been one shitty President after another. I was just a kid when Carter was Pres. but I don't remember anything good about those years. Reagan was Pres. when I was growing up and I consider him to be the absolute worst. He was nothing but an empty husk, and that was before he got Alzheimers's. Obama is probably the best of the lot, but that isn't exactly high praise.

[Angry Dragon]

121. Raygun was at the very least early stage Alzheimers when first

elected and it was down hill from there ......... that is my opinion

[sakabatou]

103. Herbert Hoover?

Hoover was pretty bad.

[pam4water]

106. No there hasn't been one that has been as disappointing as Obama. Never been one that sold out this

fast. The last disappointment this big in the Democratic party was when Hubert Humphrey lost to Nixon.

[Major Hogwash]

109. Really?

Weren't you disappointed when Kerry lost to Bush in 2004?

[wizstars]

126. no, the last big one was when Al Gore caved to the dumb-child W

[kwassa]

113. All presidents have been disappointing; the difference is only degree.

I have very low expectations for Presidents. I never expected transformation from Obama.

Carter was a good man and a lousy leader. He didn't have the big political skills, and it never seemed like he was in charge of his own government. He lasted one term.

Johnson was great domestically, lousy on the Vietnam War.

Clinton was downright embarrassing early in his administration; he couldn't backtrack fast enough. High-speed in reverse. He finally grew some balls with the second government shutdown, and was also popular despite Lewinski and all that as we were in boom times economically.

I can barely remember Kennedy, but he had his controversies, too.

[Fearless]

115. Obama ran a populist campaign and turned on the the people afterward. In short, no.

[LWolf]

116. No.

If Clinton was the best modern Republican president we ever had, Obama has got to be tied for the worst modern Republican president, side by side with Ronald Reagan.

[robcon]

117. Carter was the most disappointing in my lifetime.

n/t

[yellowwood]

118. I don't even like the question

This question is like "When did you stop beating your wife?"
I am disappointed that Obama has inherited eight years of miserable leadership under George Bush. He is having to dig us out of a hole that someone else dug.

[democrat2thecore]

132. By reappointing and elevating the VERY people who caused that crisis -nt

[Quantess]

120. yes, GW Bush.

He was far worse than I had expected.

[AngkorWot]

122. That god damn liar Abraham Lincoln.

Refused to take a pro-abolition stance for years because he hated human rights. Led our country into war. Always looked for a compromise. Never had a simple, firm official policy on everything. Then what did he do with those treasonous criminals after the war? He gave them all amnesty.

Ooo, I've never been so man.

[Rex]

123. John Kerry.

Ohio 2004.

[madamesilverspurs]

127. This sewage is really swamping DU of late.

Small wonder that so many have departed for much higher ground.

[solara]

128. Hear Hear

[Safetykitten]

129. Carter. It's stupifying. I thought that another like him would be mathematically impossible.

[DCBob]

135. Bush was so fulfilling.

i could puke.

[WillyT]

136. Carter For The Weakness, Clinton For The Triangulation...

:shrug:

[quiller4]

137. I'm not that disappointed in Obama and my expectations from

Clinton were higher. I was more disappointed in Clinton''s first term that I have been with either Obama. I was not disappointed in Carter and was a Carter delegate to convention in 1980. In the late 1970s my disdain was reserved for Democrats in Congress who undercut Carter.

[pipoman]

140. Disappointing is an interesting word..

it implies an expectation unfulfilled. Actually, every president I can remember (back to Nixon), have disappointed me. It is the overall body of work as president which becomes relevant, in the whole scheme of things. I am less disappointed when a republican does something I dislike, I had no expectation of anything else.

That said, I think my biggest disappointment in a president had to be Bill Clinton's support of "free trade agreements" with less than savory "partners"... The death of the labor party..

[Blue_In_AK]

141. Honestly?

They've ALL been disappointing, at least all the ones in my adult life, i.e., the past 45 years.