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.
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.
He allowed American Surveillance with Patriot Act I and II.
People at the time were begging for that. There were a very, very few civil libertarians that realized just how dangerous those acts would be, but the people, as a whole, were really behind them. Just like the people went in gung-ho for the start of GWoT.
He is essentially the ripple effect of everything we’re dealing with today and Trump is merely the symptom of that.
I'd put that at the feet of Reagan first. Reagan was the one that cozied up to the 'moral majority', which was based in racism and misogyny, what with Bob Jones University being forced to desegregate. That's where the birth of the alt-right (which I guess is now just mainstream Republicans) happened.
People at the time were begging for that. There were a very, very few civil libertarians that realized just how dangerous those acts would be, but the people, as a whole, were really behind them. Just like the people went in gung-ho for the start of GWoT.
"Do you want the terrorists to win?!?" was hurled at me a bunch back then.
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).
Btw. question from Germany regarding Trumps Felony: I read that people convicted of a felony may not vote yet I also read that Trump cast his in Florida. Hoe does it actually work?
It is complicated because the rules are different in each state. Also, Trump was convicted in New York state but he resides and votes in Florida.
For out-of-state convictions, Florida defers to the other state's rules. New York would allow Trump to vote if he resided there because he is not currently in prison, so Trump can vote in Florida legally.
Sentencing was delayed until after Nov. 5th, and now it's been permanently delayed. I'm sure the conviction will be overturned at some point while he's in office
Non burgers here: I believe the sentencing for the conviction was delayed till after the election. And since that they have announced it has been delayed indefinitely.
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.
We'll see if 47 surpasses him. He's set up to do so. It's going to be wild to see what happens when Trump order troops to fire into crowds of American citizens.
We always seem to get this crazy hyperbole that Trump is going to be some competent fascist that's going to perform some great coup that will end the US, but in reality it always seems the real damage he does is the evil bureaucracy that erodes rights and liberties while exacerbating things in foreign policy.
Jan 6th was very flashy, but comparatively speaking, nothing really happened.
Pretty much all of them actively participated in various genocides and massacres, either directly like native genocide or Philippines or all the aerial massacres of XX and XXI century (even the one who was president for a month), or indirectly like even the "most peaceful president" Carter supported the massacres in Indonesia.
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.
Dubya at least had a face of 'compassionate' conservatism, and believed in the rule of law. Yeah, he bent the law a lot, but he never outright broke it. He was incompetent--or, he was at least not up to the task of being a president--but not apparently malicious.
Pity that SCOTUS stepped in with the Florida recount, since it was eventually found that Gore should have won. I wonder where we'd be on climate change now if Gore had won? Oh well Florida, enjoy your flooding and hurricanes.
Don't forget that the SCOTUS appointed by 47 ended the American experiment since Presidents are now effectively kings. Thanks to Presidential immunity, we no longer get to say nobody is above the law.
Elected Temporary Dictator with small restrictions.
They still have to get rid of elections to make thing permanent, and time will tell if they actually managed to do so.
The federal government doesn't run elections, states do. Whether or not states decide to resist the tyranny of the federal government will decide if we will have legitimate elections.
Swing States do not all have a republican trifecta.
Also remember there are non-maga republicans, like Brad Raffensperger.
And president does not yet have unlimited power, only immunity from breaking laws. The president still have to find those yes-men to do their bidding.
He cant just say "Kill all Democrats" on day one. That aint happening. The military isnt maga yet.
It takes time to purge the military. Not every non-maga military member is gonna announce their beliefs. You cant find them all and purge them all in 4 years. Hitler already had a majority of loyalists in the military when he became chancellor. trump does not. Not yet.
When the federal government becones tyrannical, states can declare federal actions unconstitutional and use their state national guards. Then our country's fate is up to the military and national guards.
The US can totally become a dictatorship forever if we don't change course, but there is still time to reverse course.
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.
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.