Favorite President ?

[Bubblehead1980]

Okay, just want everyone to share their favorite US President and possible 3-4 reasons why if you can.Do not want an argument etc, just share.I am curious because we have quite the mix of political views here.

[Diopos]

President: Unborn.
Reason: Obvious.


.

[Castout]

JFK.

1. He believed in what he was saying when you look at him giving speech
2. He has got some sort of idealism which was validated with him being killed by non foreign agent. If it had been foreign agent WWIII would've already erupted or at the very least, a counter assassination of the Soviet highest leader would have happened. It's that obvious.
3. His speech about an evil secret society, coming from a US president in office no less

The greatest modern day American however in my opinion would be Martin Luther King Jr.

[CCIP]

Thomas Jefferson for me - reasons being primarily his views of individual rights, education, justice and the economy/socioeconomics (in particular as regard corporations). I agree with what he espoused in regard to these things, almost entirely. He did a good job of preserving these and advancing them somewhat. Not perfect (particularly as regards to his controversial dealings with slavery and Indian affairs), but a lot of the values he espoused and helped institute always stood, to me, as the fundamental things that made the rest of the world always look up to America. Though of course I say that as a non-American.

[Takeda Shingen]

Can't say that I have a favorite. I regard presidents as being either effective or ineffective in their work. I'll list three presidents that I feel are on each end of that.

Effective:

Abraham Lincoln: Reasons obvious. Probably the closest I have to 'favorite'.

Andrew Jackson: I detest his treatement of the Native American populace, but he did pave the way for the expansion of the United States. He also layed the ground work for the modern system of the federal government.

Franklin Roosevelt: SEC, FDIC, Social Security, minimum wage. Love him or not, those are now fixtures American governance.

Ineffective:

Andrew Johnson: Really botched reconstruction, didn't he?

William Henry Harrison: Sorry, but you can't be effective when you are in office for only 30 days.

Warren Harding: Too much poker, not enough watching the treasury department.

JFK.
because he had an unusual name thats very easy to spell

[Ducimus]

Andrew Jackson.

I can't say i like how he treated Native American's, but overall he was the common mans president. A tough, down to earth, grizzled man who took on the fat bankers.... and won.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Can't say that I have a favorite. I regard presidents as being either effective or ineffective in their work. I'll list three presidents that I feel are on each end of that.

Effective:

Abraham Lincoln: Reasons obvious. Probably the closest I have to 'favorite'.

Andrew Jackson: I detest his treatement of the Native American populace, but he did pave the way for the expansion of the United States. He also layed the ground work for the modern system of the federal government.

Franklin Roosevelt: SEC, FDIC, Social Security, minimum wage. Love him or not, those are now fixtures American governance.

Ineffective:

Andrew Johnson: Really botched reconstruction, didn't he?

William Henry Harrison: Sorry, but you can't be effective when you are in office for only 30 days.

Warren Harding: Too much poker, not enough watching the treasury department.

Excellent post!

My favorite was Lincoln for obvious reasons, followed by Reagan. Reagan's ability to communicate to many as though it were a private conversation was incredible. Also, I find his policies to be largely responsible for an expedited, chilled ending to the Cold War.

[Sailor Steve]

George Washington. He could have been a military dictator, but he stepped down when the time came, and threatened to court-martial anyone who suggested otherwise. He could have been king, but made sure that was impossible. When John Adams wanted Congress to give Washington the title "His Excellency, the President of the United States and Defender of Their Freedoms", it was Washington who suggested a more appropriate title might be "Mister President".

There hasn't been one like him since.

[Oberon]

Being a European, I'm rather on the outside when it comes to US Presidents, however, and I'm more of a center-left in regards to my political views, but my favourite president is most likely Ronald Reagan. It was his ability to communicate to the public that I liked, and his humour.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by Oberon

and his humour.

Nah Bush is even funnier. He's funny even when he didn't mean it .

[mookiemookie]

I admire Teddy Roosevelt. He championed the idea of the "Square Deal," which he would have been lambasted by the drooling yahoos of today for. He wanted to reign in corporate excesses, namely in the railroads:

Our aim is not to do away with corporations; on the contrary, these big aggregations are an inevitable development of modern industrialism, and the effort to destroy them would be futile unless accomplished in ways that would work the utmost mischief to the entire body politic. We can do nothing of good in the way of regulating and supervising these corporations until we fix clearly in our minds that we are not attacking the corporations, but endeavoring to do away with any evil in them. We are not hostile to them; we are merely determined that they shall be so handled as to subserve the public good. We draw the line against misconduct, not against wealth

Plus, he was a badass. I mean here he is riding a swimming moose:

[Happy Times]

Reagan.

I've discussed academic, unless we realize we're in a war that must be won.

Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer -- not an easy answer -- but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.

We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the "Iron Curtain" Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one."
Now let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace -- and you can have it in the next second -- surrender.

Admittedly, there's a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face -- that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand -- the ultimatum. And what then -- when Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we're retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the final ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary, because by that time we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he's heard voices pleading for "peace at any price" or "better Red than dead," or as one commentator put it, he'd rather "live on his knees than die on his feet." And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us.

You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin -- just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it's a simple answer after all.

You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." "There is a point beyond which they must not advance." And this -- this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater's "peace through strength."
Winston Churchill said, "The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we're spirits -- not animals." And he said, "There's something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.

We'll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we'll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

I admire Teddy Roosevelt. He championed the idea of the "Square Deal," which he would have been lambasted by the drooling yahoos of today for. He wanted to reign in corporate excesses, namely in the railroads:



Plus, he was a badass. I mean here he is riding a swimming moose:

Teddy Roosevelt = Awesome!

He has to be on any short list of the best world leaders.

He was also the first US President to travel aboard a Submarine.

[the_tyrant]

Teddy Roosevelt for sure！(although i'm canadian)

come on, he was shot before a speech and he insisted on finishing it