Jump to content
270soft Forum

Ranking 21st Century Presidents, Nominees, and Candidates


Recommended Posts

Feel free to make your own list. 

1. Ranking of 21st Century US Presidents (includes Bill Clinton who had one year in the 21st century):

  • Barack Obama
    • Trump's presidency sort of underlines how impactful Obama's presidency actually was. It seems as if Trump's major impulse is to erase Obama's legacy, but it really just makes it stronger. Obama did what Teddy Roosevelt, La Follette, FDR, Truman, LBJ, Carter, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and Hillary Clinton advocated but couldn't accomplish--government healthcare. Obama also normalized Liberal-to-Progressive politics once again after over three decades of Democratic moderate dominance. He improved our standing with our allies after after they had fallen under the Bush years. He pulled us out of the Great Recession and sent the economy on a trajectory that it is still holding on to today. He officially ended the war in Iraq (although troops still remained...). He presided during the killing of Osama Bin Laden. He presided during the legalization of Gay Marriage. He greatly reduced military troops overseas. His Arab Spring involvement is arguably a disaster--depends on the country--but mostly was counterproductive. Gets some blame for ISIS with Bush. Is the best of the 21st century, but would probably fall closer to the middle if all presidents were included. Overall, like Trump, was mostly rhetoric, possibly due to both of them not having Congress on their side for most of their presidencies. Vastly popular as he was leaving office, and he's still vastly popular today. 
  • Bill Clinton
    • Great economy, but had few major accomplishment. Ignored the Rwandan Genocide, which is a rare instance when intervention should have occurred. Waffled or fence-sitted on a lot of social issues. Will probably be forgotten in 100 years by all but historians and amateur historians. Sometimes gets exclusive credit for NAFTA, but he only helped it get through Congress. It was Reagan's idea, and Bush I did most of the work spearheading it and negotiating it. Failed on Healthcare. Impeached, but had high approval even during impeachment. 
  • Donald Trump 
    • To his credit he's keeping Obama's economy afloat; however, some argue it's keeping afloat despite Trump's protectionism and trade wars. Mostly rhetoric. Vastly unpopular. Vastly unpresidential. Impeached. 
  • George W. Bush
    • (I like Bush more than Trump, but Bush inaugurated the Great Recession, inaugurated the unnecessary Iraq War when we were already in a war, and is arguably the most important president in creating ISIS by stabilizing Iraq, which allowed for the destabilization of the entire region. I really want to place Trump here, but Trump has been so ineffective and pathetically weak as a president as to almost safe guard him from doing anything as bad as Bush was able to "accomplish." Trump is easily rhetorically the worst, the most corrupt, and the most scandalous. However, more lives and more livelihoods have been lost because of  Bush than under any of the above.)
  1. Ranking of 21st Century Nominees as Nominees. (note: The focus is on those best equipped to handle the issues of the present and of the future, and the one that would be most electable vs a generic candidate). 
    1. Barack Obama (His biggest weakness is a lack of national-level politics. His years as a Constitutional scholar, community organizer, and his innate intelligence, charisma, and bold forward-thinking ideas raises him to the top. 
    2. John McCain (Bipartisan when it counts. Would have been trusted by both sides in a major emergency. Worrisome love of intervention, however.)
    3. Mitt Romney (Service as MA governor shows he's open to liberal ideas, such as healthcare. Would have been flexible and flipflopped from conservative campaign rhetoric from time to time.)
    4. Al Gore (would rank higher if had ran and been the nominee once his focus was more on climate. Had few ideas and little character in 2000)
    5. John Kerry (charisma of a crypt keeper)
    6. George W. Bush
    7. Hillary Clinton (arguably the 2nd worst presidential nominee in US History)
    8. Donald Trump (arguably the worst presidential nominee in US History)
  2. Ranking of 21st Century Candidates as Candidates (only including those that won a primary. The focus is on those best equipped to handle the issues of the present and of the future, and the one that would be most electable vs a generic candidate)
    1. Barack Obama
    2. John McCain
    3. Howard Dean
    4. Mitt Romney
    5. John Kasich
    6. Bernie Sanders (ranks this high for putting a focus on major issues facing the US today and tomorrow---climate, income inequality, education, healthcare--and other forward-thinking ideas. He loses to the above mostly because the presidency requires the ability to compromise, give-and-take, etc. I believe, as much as I like him, that Sanders would be a puritan similar to Ron Paul or Ted Cruz. 
    7. Wesley Clark
    8. Marco Rubio
    9. Al Gore
    10. John Kerry
    11. George W. Bush
    12. Hillary Clinton (beats the below because she isn't lazy and isn't a theocrat.)
    13. Newt Gingrich (theocratic and scandalous tendencies aside, one of the most intelligent and idea-producing people out there. If the country faced a major international crisis, he's find innovative ways to handle them. He would have been most dangerous during a time of relative calm when he could focus on domestic issues. I'd certainly like a progressive, high integrity version of Gingrich -- proliferater of ideas and dominant. His peak was the 1990s. By 2012, he was kind of mentally slipping as his ideas more half-baked)
    14. John Edwards (Lazy and untrustworthy, despite pleasing rhetoric)
    15. Mike Huckabee
    16. Ted Cruz (Would rank dead last if this was just a personal ranking on who I like most and like least). 
    17. Rick Santorum (the anti- new ideas guy, and said as such)
    18. Donald Trump (objectively a terrible candidate. No relevant experience for this office--better suited for a Business-only position in an administration, but he would never follow orders and likely would be fired for scandal. His support comes from his personality, rhetoric, and his willingness to embrace White Nationalistic and/or Nativist ideals). 
    19. Ron Paul (Any candidate that wants to destroy the Federal government--especially in the areas that are most helpful to the poor or underpriveledged--must rank dead last. He is mostly right on in regards to intervention and anti-corruption, however. Better to take the best ideas from him than to elevate him in total to the presidency. 
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

Did you mean that you like Bush more than Trump?  Wasn't sure if that was a typo or not.

Yeah. That was a typo. Thanks! fixed it

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Ranking of 21st Century US Presidents (includes Bill Clinton who had one year in the 21st century):

  • Barack Obama
    • Not a perfect President by any means, especially when it came to foreign policy, where it will surprise few here to find that I felt he was too weak.  Obamacare was a huge and important win, but was poorly rolled out.  Presided over the national legalization of gay marriage, but was so slow to get on board that he was beaten to the table by his own Vice President.  Yet despite these occasional stumbles, he pulled off phenomenal successes.  He took the economy from devastation to an all-time (at the time) high.  He made the call that successfully found and killed Osama Bin Laden.  And as @vcczar indicated, he made the world America's friend again, after they'd started to waiver in the Bush years.  Obama was the best President of my lifetime, hands down.  
  • George W. Bush
    • Presided over the most devastating terror attack in our nation's history, on a scale previously unforeseeable.  Led our nation back from intense fear to most of us not giving a second thought when boarding a plane or even hearing one now.  I know a lot of folks on this forum were probably kids or younger when the attacks happened, and maybe they were shielded from a lot of it by their parents.  But I was 18 when it happened, and literally every adult I knew was on edge for months if not a full year or two after it happened.  He led us back to feeling safe again, rebuilding from the rubble, reopening the airlines, and shoring up our defenses.  The entire world changed over the course of a few hours one day, and he had to find a way to bring us back to normal while also making sure that it didn't happen again -- and he pulled it off, better than could be expected given the circumstances.  He's another one who was not by any means perfect.  I do feel the Iraq war was essential, but there should have been a stronger exit strategy.  His stance against gay marriage was just flat out wrong, even for the era.  And he was so focused on demonstrating strength abroad that he missed the warning signs that our economy was weakening at home.  But he did his best in an impossible scenario.  Also, the fact that he's spent his retirement painting heart felt portraits of soldiers wounded in the war speaks to where his heart is and was, and how he is trying to make amends for his mistakes.  I know ya'll hate him, don't care.  I love the guy.
  • Bill Clinton
    • Honestly, I was 10 - 17 during the Clinton years, so I was way more focused on girls at that time than on what was happening in the White House.  I guess Clinton and I had that in common.  From my childhood perspective, things were fine and I have no real complaints, but -- don't cheat on your wife, don't put your daughter through that, and even if you're single, keep your penis away from your interns!   These are not difficult rules to follow for a grown man, I follow all three every day with ease.
  • Donald Trump 
    • Honestly, if we didn't worry about presidencies and instead just listed every single human I'd ever heard of, Donald Trump would still be in the bottom five.  I don't have the words to express the anger I feel every god damned day when I see another reminder that he not only exists, but is somehow the President of the United States.  I used to love this country so much that I was willing to lay down my life to defend it, and now I don't even know how our current troops can bear to put on the uniform.  What a fucking disgrace.

Ranking of 21st Century Nominees as Nominees. (I didn't really understand this section so I skipped it.)
 

Ranking of 21st Century Candidates as Candidates (only including those that won a primary. The focus is on those best equipped to handle the issues of the present and of the future, and the one that would be most electable vs a generic candidate)

 

1. Barack Obama
2. Everyone Else
17. John McCain for blowing a winnable election by choosing Sarah Palin
18. Donald Trump
19. Hillary Clinton for losing to Donald Trump.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Actinguy said:

Ranking of 21st Century Candidates as Candidates (only including those that won a primary. The focus is on those best equipped to handle the issues of the present and of the future, and the one that would be most electable vs a generic candidate)

 

1. Barack Obama
2. Everyone Else
17. John McCain for blowing a winnable election by choosing Sarah Palin
18. Donald Trump
19. Hillary Clinton for losing to Donald Trump.

If I accounted for what they did as candidates or nominees, I would have lowered McCain too. I was thinking exclusively him as a person/politician. The nominee section was basically the same as the candidate section but stripped of non-nominees. There was going to be a difference but then I just realized the rankings were basically the same but one with and one without non-nominees. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, vcczar said:

If I accounted for what they did as candidates or nominees, I would have lowered McCain too. I was thinking exclusively him as a person/politician. The nominee section was basically the same as the candidate section but stripped of non-nominees. There was going to be a difference but then I just realized the rankings were basically the same but one with and one without non-nominees. 

Fair enough.  I wasn't sure if I was supposed to rank them based on their readiness to handle the issues of their era, or by 2020 standards/issues.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, vcczar said:

Feel free to make your own list. 

1. Ranking of 21st Century US Presidents (includes Bill Clinton who had one year in the 21st century):

  • Barack Obama
    • Trump's presidency sort of underlines how impactful Obama's presidency actually was. It seems as if Trump's major impulse is to erase Obama's legacy, but it really just makes it stronger. Obama did what Teddy Roosevelt, La Follette, FDR, Truman, LBJ, Carter, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and Hillary Clinton advocated but couldn't accomplish--government healthcare. Obama also normalized Liberal-to-Progressive politics once again after over three decades of Democratic moderate dominance. He improved our standing with our allies after after they had fallen under the Bush years. He pulled us out of the Great Recession and sent the economy on a trajectory that it is still holding on to today. He officially ended the war in Iraq (although troops still remained...). He presided during the killing of Osama Bin Laden. He presided during the legalization of Gay Marriage. He greatly reduced military troops overseas. His Arab Spring involvement is arguably a disaster--depends on the country--but mostly was counterproductive. Gets some blame for ISIS with Bush. Is the best of the 21st century, but would probably fall closer to the middle if all presidents were included. Overall, like Trump, was mostly rhetoric, possibly due to both of them not having Congress on their side for most of their presidencies. Vastly popular as he was leaving office, and he's still vastly popular today. 
  • Bill Clinton
    • Great economy, but had few major accomplishment. Ignored the Rwandan Genocide, which is a rare instance when intervention should have occurred. Waffled or fence-sitted on a lot of social issues. Will probably be forgotten in 100 years by all but historians and amateur historians. Sometimes gets exclusive credit for NAFTA, but he only helped it get through Congress. It was Reagan's idea, and Bush I did most of the work spearheading it and negotiating it. Failed on Healthcare. Impeached, but had high approval even during impeachment. 
  • Donald Trump 
    • To his credit he's keeping Obama's economy afloat; however, some argue it's keeping afloat despite Trump's protectionism and trade wars. Mostly rhetoric. Vastly unpopular. Vastly unpresidential. Impeached. 
  • George W. Bush
    • (I like Bush more than Trump, but Bush inaugurated the Great Recession, inaugurated the unnecessary Iraq War when we were already in a war, and is arguably the most important president in creating ISIS by stabilizing Iraq, which allowed for the destabilization of the entire region. I really want to place Trump here, but Trump has been so ineffective and pathetically weak as a president as to almost safe guard him from doing anything as bad as Bush was able to "accomplish." Trump is easily rhetorically the worst, the most corrupt, and the most scandalous. However, more lives and more livelihoods have been lost because of  Bush than under any of the above.)
  1. Ranking of 21st Century Nominees as Nominees. (note: The focus is on those best equipped to handle the issues of the present and of the future, and the one that would be most electable vs a generic candidate). 
    1. Barack Obama (His biggest weakness is a lack of national-level politics. His years as a Constitutional scholar, community organizer, and his innate intelligence, charisma, and bold forward-thinking ideas raises him to the top. 
    2. John McCain (Bipartisan when it counts. Would have been trusted by both sides in a major emergency. Worrisome love of intervention, however.)
    3. Mitt Romney (Service as MA governor shows he's open to liberal ideas, such as healthcare. Would have been flexible and flipflopped from conservative campaign rhetoric from time to time.)
    4. Al Gore (would rank higher if had ran and been the nominee once his focus was more on climate. Had few ideas and little character in 2000)
    5. John Kerry (charisma of a crypt keeper)
    6. George W. Bush
    7. Hillary Clinton (arguably the 2nd worst presidential nominee in US History)
    8. Donald Trump (arguably the worst presidential nominee in US History)
  2. Ranking of 21st Century Candidates as Candidates (only including those that won a primary. The focus is on those best equipped to handle the issues of the present and of the future, and the one that would be most electable vs a generic candidate)
    1. Barack Obama
    2. John McCain
    3. Howard Dean
    4. Mitt Romney
    5. John Kasich
    6. Bernie Sanders (ranks this high for putting a focus on major issues facing the US today and tomorrow---climate, income inequality, education, healthcare--and other forward-thinking ideas. He loses to the above mostly because the presidency requires the ability to compromise, give-and-take, etc. I believe, as much as I like him, that Sanders would be a puritan similar to Ron Paul or Ted Cruz. 
    7. Wesley Clark
    8. Marco Rubio
    9. Al Gore
    10. John Kerry
    11. George W. Bush
    12. Hillary Clinton (beats the below because she isn't lazy and isn't a theocrat.)
    13. Newt Gingrich (theocratic and scandalous tendencies aside, one of the most intelligent and idea-producing people out there. If the country faced a major international crisis, he's find innovative ways to handle them. He would have been most dangerous during a time of relative calm when he could focus on domestic issues. I'd certainly like a progressive, high integrity version of Gingrich -- proliferater of ideas and dominant. His peak was the 1990s. By 2012, he was kind of mentally slipping as his ideas more half-baked)
    14. John Edwards (Lazy and untrustworthy, despite pleasing rhetoric)
    15. Mike Huckabee
    16. Ted Cruz (Would rank dead last if this was just a personal ranking on who I like most and like least). 
    17. Rick Santorum (the anti- new ideas guy, and said as such)
    18. Donald Trump (objectively a terrible candidate. No relevant experience for this office--better suited for a Business-only position in an administration, but he would never follow orders and likely would be fired for scandal. His support comes from his personality, rhetoric, and his willingness to embrace White Nationalistic and/or Nativist ideals). 
    19. Ron Paul (Any candidate that wants to destroy the Federal government--especially in the areas that are most helpful to the poor or underpriveledged--must rank dead last. He is mostly right on in regards to intervention and anti-corruption, however. Better to take the best ideas from him than to elevate him in total to the presidency. 

 

4 hours ago, Actinguy said:

1. Ranking of 21st Century US Presidents (includes Bill Clinton who had one year in the 21st century):

  • Barack Obama
    • Not a perfect President by any means, especially when it came to foreign policy, where it will surprise few here to find that I felt he was too weak.  Obamacare was a huge and important win, but was poorly rolled out.  Presided over the national legalization of gay marriage, but was so slow to get on board that he was beaten to the table by his own Vice President.  Yet despite these occasional stumbles, he pulled off phenomenal successes.  He took the economy from devastation to an all-time (at the time) high.  He made the call that successfully found and killed Osama Bin Laden.  And as @vcczar indicated, he made the world America's friend again, after they'd started to waiver in the Bush years.  Obama was the best President of my lifetime, hands down.  
  • George W. Bush
    • Presided over the most devastating terror attack in our nation's history, on a scale previously unforeseeable.  Led our nation back from intense fear to most of us not giving a second thought when boarding a plane or even hearing one now.  I know a lot of folks on this forum were probably kids or younger when the attacks happened, and maybe they were shielded from a lot of it by their parents.  But I was 18 when it happened, and literally every adult I knew was on edge for months if not a full year or two after it happened.  He led us back to feeling safe again, rebuilding from the rubble, reopening the airlines, and shoring up our defenses.  The entire world changed over the course of a few hours one day, and he had to find a way to bring us back to normal while also making sure that it didn't happen again -- and he pulled it off, better than could be expected given the circumstances.  He's another one who was not by any means perfect.  I do feel the Iraq war was essential, but there should have been a stronger exit strategy.  His stance against gay marriage was just flat out wrong, even for the era.  And he was so focused on demonstrating strength abroad that he missed the warning signs that our economy was weakening at home.  But he did his best in an impossible scenario.  Also, the fact that he's spent his retirement painting heart felt portraits of soldiers wounded in the war speaks to where his heart is and was, and how he is trying to make amends for his mistakes.  I know ya'll hate him, don't care.  I love the guy.
  • Bill Clinton
    • Honestly, I was 10 - 17 during the Clinton years, so I was way more focused on girls at that time than on what was happening in the White House.  I guess Clinton and I had that in common.  From my childhood perspective, things were fine and I have no real complaints, but -- don't cheat on your wife, don't put your daughter through that, and even if you're single, keep your penis away from your interns!   These are not difficult rules to follow for a grown man, I follow all three every day with ease.
  • Donald Trump 
    • Honestly, if we didn't worry about presidencies and instead just listed every single human I'd ever heard of, Donald Trump would still be in the bottom five.  I don't have the words to express the anger I feel every god damned day when I see another reminder that he not only exists, but is somehow the President of the United States.  I used to love this country so much that I was willing to lay down my life to defend it, and now I don't even know how our current troops can bear to put on the uniform.  What a fucking disgrace.

Ranking of 21st Century Nominees as Nominees. (I didn't really understand this section so I skipped it.)
 

Ranking of 21st Century Candidates as Candidates (only including those that won a primary. The focus is on those best equipped to handle the issues of the present and of the future, and the one that would be most electable vs a generic candidate)

 

1. Barack Obama
2. Everyone Else
17. John McCain for blowing a winnable election by choosing Sarah Palin
18. Donald Trump
19. Hillary Clinton for losing to Donald Trump.

The 21st Century thus far has not been good for Presidents and major party candidates. We've got warmongers (and war criminals) demanding endless blood and destruction abroad, much of it based on lies, false pretenses, or enriching big corporations, Torquemada-style treatment of prisoners of war, and secret police and police state tactics and other Constitutional violations at home, we have bold reformers like Obama who could not at all deliver their vaunted promises and message (who also quietly carried on a lot of the policies listed above, as well), and passel of candidates claiming to apply "Christian principles," to Government, but only using the Lord's Name in Vane to justify oppressive, hateful, evil, wicked, corrupt, and self-serving policies, we have the blatantly corrupt, egotistical, narcissistic, but ideologically devoid and bankrupt showman that's in the White House right now. Then there are those who, whether overtly or by intimation, use their demographic to try to draw in Progressives who don't think about it too much, or look up more about the candidate, but any true Progressive should be wary of trusting them because of past issues they've firmly been a part of, or supported - people like Kamala Harris or Peter Buttigieg. Ron Paul has conviction, and a clarity of ideology and vision, and a some good ideas (especially regarding foreign and military policy), but NOT nearly enough. Thus, by default, I'd say Kucinich, Sanders, and maybe Warren are probably the top - and among the only truly palatable - ones on my list. But it's still FAR from a stellar list to get over the Moon in excitement over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Patine said:

 

The 21st Century thus far has not been good for Presidents and major party candidates. We've got warmongers (and war criminals) demanding endless blood and destruction abroad, much of it based on lies, false pretenses, or enriching big corporations, Torquemada-style treatment of prisoners of war, and secret police and police state tactics and other Constitutional violations at home, we have bold reformers like Obama who could not at all deliver their vaunted promises and message (who also quietly carried on a lot of the policies listed above, as well), and passel of candidates claiming to apply "Christian principles," to Government, but only using the Lord's Name in Vane to justify oppressive, hateful, evil, wicked, corrupt, and self-serving policies, we have the blatantly corrupt, egotistical, narcissistic, but ideologically devoid and bankrupt showman that's in the White House right now. Then there are those who, whether overtly or by intimation, use their demographic to try to draw in Progressives who don't think about it too much, or look up more about the candidate, but any true Progressive should be wary of trusting them because of past issues they've firmly been a part of, or supported - people like Kamala Harris or Peter Buttigieg. Ron Paul has conviction, and a clarity of ideology and vision, and a some good ideas (especially regarding foreign and military policy), but NOT nearly enough. Thus, by default, I'd say Kucinich, Sanders, and maybe Warren are probably the top - and among the only truly palatable - ones on my list. But it's still FAR from a stellar list to get over the Moon in excitement over.

I agree with you on Kucinich, Sanders, and Warren. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Ranking of 21st Century US Presidents (includes Bill Clinton who had one year in the 21st century):

  • Barack Obama
    • Likable,Charismatic, and brought big ideas to the surface, Obamacare for example. I disagree with Obama on so,so many issues-The ones that he is more Conservative on than alot realize, For example his immigartion policy, which though he did alot for legal immigrants (My girlfriend became a citizen alot faster than she would have if it wasn't for him), His policy on drone strikes is what I disapporve most about him, the countless civilians that where killed in the Middle East since the Sovie Unions war there, is unexcusable, and terrible, and honestly we as Americans see them as enemies, but look how many innocent middle-eastern civilians we have killed. Obama did nothing to help this, though he pulled out United States troops, he lacked on the side on preventing innocent civilian deaths. He is my #1 because of his personality, he is an incredible person, someone who was a true leader and gave us respect around the globe, I miss him greatly in that respect.
  • Bill Clinton
    • Noteably, I am only 20, and born in 1999, So i do not remember anything about Clintons presidency, But minoring in Political Science, and Majoring in the Political/Law aspect of Philosophy (Which I have done papers for both law and political science classes on Bill Clinton and his impeachment) He gets the same major points Obama did for his personality and Charisma for the hours of footage and interviews I've seen of him, I also respect his area of healthcare, which we all know a universal healthcare system nearly got passed with the help of Hillary Clinton, Until of course, the insurance companies donated to a large number of Politicians, including Clinton, which was shot down. (Watch Michael Moores documentary on healthcare everyone,please)-He got an Assault Weapons ban passed, and saw a huge boost in the economy
  • George W Bush
    • Terrible on his lies and policy with Iraq, But was moderate on immigration, which I respect him for. His personality also wasn't that bad, and he had a pretty good one. (Notice the trend of our 3 presidents before Trump this decade, which Trump then ruined, with his terrible personality and rhetoric). Bush's immediate response to 9/11 at the time it happened was great, of course we know how wrong it was, But If I where the same age when it happened as I was now, I would have been ready to throw my support behind his decision, Which I see why so many people misjudged the situation-Except as we know somebody major who was right all along, Bernie Sanders.
  • Donald Trump
  • I hate him, an actual hate, he has embarrassed our country, and I am already helping with my states Democratic Party in every way possible to make sure he doesn't get re-elected, Moving on.

   Nominees Ranked

1.Barrack Obama (When Bernie gets nominated, he will be #1)

2.Bill Clinton

3.John McCain

4.Al Gore

5.Hillary Clinton

6.Mitt Romney

7.George W Bush

8.John Kerry

9.Donald Trump

Candidates ranked

1.Bernie Sanders

2.Barrack Obama

3.Elizabeth Warren

4.Andrew Yang

T-5. Hillary Clinton 2008

T-5.Bill Clinton

6.John McCain

7.Al Gore

8.Pete Buttiegieg

9.Joe Biden

10.Dennis Kucinch

11.Hillary Clinton 2016

12.Wesley Clark

13.Howard Dean

14.Everyone else

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Patine said:

 

The 21st Century thus far has not been good for Presidents and major party candidates. We've got warmongers (and war criminals) demanding endless blood and destruction abroad, much of it based on lies, false pretenses, or enriching big corporations, Torquemada-style treatment of prisoners of war, and secret police and police state tactics and other Constitutional violations at home, we have bold reformers like Obama who could not at all deliver their vaunted promises and message (who also quietly carried on a lot of the policies listed above, as well), and passel of candidates claiming to apply "Christian principles," to Government, but only using the Lord's Name in Vane to justify oppressive, hateful, evil, wicked, corrupt, and self-serving policies, we have the blatantly corrupt, egotistical, narcissistic, but ideologically devoid and bankrupt showman that's in the White House right now. Then there are those who, whether overtly or by intimation, use their demographic to try to draw in Progressives who don't think about it too much, or look up more about the candidate, but any true Progressive should be wary of trusting them because of past issues they've firmly been a part of, or supported - people like Kamala Harris or Peter Buttigieg. Ron Paul has conviction, and a clarity of ideology and vision, and a some good ideas (especially regarding foreign and military policy), but NOT nearly enough. Thus, by default, I'd say Kucinich, Sanders, and maybe Warren are probably the top - and among the only truly palatable - ones on my list. But it's still FAR from a stellar list to get over the Moon in excitement over.

You got the nail right on the head.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Presidents:

1. Obama

2. Clinton

3. Trump (as of yet he's more of a Harding than a Nixon)

4. W. Bush

Nominees:

1. Obama (excellent campaigner, one of the best ever)

2. W. Bush (captured the national spirit of the times, at least where it mattered)

3. Kerry (would have been a winner if not for a lack of charisma)

4. Trump (unprofessional...but managed to tap into something that perhaps no other Republican could have done so that year. The fact that the 'something' is quite ugly is besides the point, IMO, for this ranking)

5. McCain (the Palin pick and the resortment to mud-slinging brings him down several notches)

6. Gore (ran a tin-eared campaign and essentially missed an open goal)

7. Romney (the defining moment was the 47% tape)

8. Hillary Clinton (just awful, and made all the more awful by not exactly being a political novice)

 

Candidates:

1. Obama

2. Bush

3. Kerry

4. Trump

5. McCain

As for the rest, Hillary Clinton should rank pretty low here too. She blew clear frontrunner status in 2008 and even struggled to win against a self-described socialist who hadn't previously been in the Democratic Party in 2016. Romney also made heavy weather of winning the nomination against poor opposition in 2012, so he should rank quite lowly too. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RFK/JFKfan said:

Presidents:

1. Obama

2. Clinton

3. Trump (as of yet he's more of a Harding than a Nixon)

4. W. Bush

Nominees:

1. Obama (excellent campaigner, one of the best ever)

2. W. Bush (captured the national spirit of the times, at least where it mattered)

3. Kerry (would have been a winner if not for a lack of charisma)

4. Trump (unprofessional...but managed to tap into something that perhaps no other Republican could have done so that year. The fact that the 'something' is quite ugly is besides the point, IMO, for this ranking)

5. McCain (the Palin pick and the resortment to mud-slinging brings him down several notches)

6. Gore (ran a tin-eared campaign and essentially missed an open goal)

7. Romney (the defining moment was the 47% tape)

8. Hillary Clinton (just awful, and made all the more awful by not exactly being a political novice)

 

Candidates:

1. Obama

2. Bush

3. Kerry

4. Trump

5. McCain

As for the rest, Hillary Clinton should rank pretty low here too. She blew clear frontrunner status in 2008 and even struggled to win against a self-described socialist who hadn't previously been in the Democratic Party in 2016. Romney also made heavy weather of winning the nomination against poor opposition in 2012, so he should rank quite lowly too. 

 

Good comments and observations. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/24/2020 at 10:50 AM, Patine said:

 

The 21st Century thus far has not been good for Presidents and major party candidates. We've got warmongers (and war criminals) demanding endless blood and destruction abroad, much of it based on lies, false pretenses, or enriching big corporations, Torquemada-style treatment of prisoners of war, and secret police and police state tactics and other Constitutional violations at home, we have bold reformers like Obama who could not at all deliver their vaunted promises and message (who also quietly carried on a lot of the policies listed above, as well), and passel of candidates claiming to apply "Christian principles," to Government, but only using the Lord's Name in Vane to justify oppressive, hateful, evil, wicked, corrupt, and self-serving policies, we have the blatantly corrupt, egotistical, narcissistic, but ideologically devoid and bankrupt showman that's in the White House right now. Then there are those who, whether overtly or by intimation, use their demographic to try to draw in Progressives who don't think about it too much, or look up more about the candidate, but any true Progressive should be wary of trusting them because of past issues they've firmly been a part of, or supported - people like Kamala Harris or Peter Buttigieg. Ron Paul has conviction, and a clarity of ideology and vision, and a some good ideas (especially regarding foreign and military policy), but NOT nearly enough. Thus, by default, I'd say Kucinich, Sanders, and maybe Warren are probably the top - and among the only truly palatable - ones on my list. But it's still FAR from a stellar list to get over the Moon in excitement over.

Warren? She's just another member of the establishment.  The real anti-war folks are Kucinich, Sanders, Gabbard, Gravel, and Ron Paul.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jinsu Kim said:

Warren? She's just another member of the establishment.  The real anti-war folks are Kucinich, Sanders, Gabbard, Gravel, and Ron Paul.

Anti-war is a big part of what I'm talking about, but not, by far, everything. Ron Paul, instance, would liquidate almost all government services and responsibilities to sociopathic mega-corporations, and then free them from any meaningful bonds of regulation. It would end up a de facto Corporate Dictatorship like some of those old '80's science fiction dystopian movies. And I don't trust Gabbard for other reasons. And Gravel would likely drop dead within the first year or two in office due to his age.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...