NationStates Jolt Archive

I was playing Hearts of Iron II today, as the Americans. And when the time came to pick an election winner in 1936 I chose Alf Landon rather than Roosevelt.

So I started reading up on the guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alf_Landon), and he wasn't all that bad. He just ran a bad campaign and got his butt kicked on a monumental scale.

So who do you think was the best presidential could-have-been?

[comedy option]Bob Dole[/comedy option]

Robert Taft.

So who do you think was the best presidential could-have-been?

Al Gore.

I like him. Based upon the Wiki article, he sounds like someone I would've voted for, and his criticisms of FDR's policies were pretty accurate. Honestly, I agree with pretty much everything listed in the Wiki article, especially in regard to foreign relations with China and the ECM.

Imagine if China had opened up in the 1950's or 1960's rather than the 1970's; the country could've been spared the devastation of the Cultural Revolution and would be a lot closer to a fully dynamic, developed market economy today.

Robert Taft.
He never actually made it into an election proper, did he?

He never actually made it into an election proper, did he?

As in received his party's nomination? I don't think so.

I'm always amazed at people who think they can win without really trying at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_M._Cox

In general, read They Also Ran

Imagine if China had opened up in the 1950's or 1960's rather than the 1970's; the country could've been spared the devastation of the Cultural Revolution and would be a lot closer to a fully dynamic, developed market economy today.

Cultural Revolution was more of a way for Mao to eliminate threats in his own rank and maintain in power after the great leap forward.

Al Gore.

He'd certainly be better than the chimpanzee misruling us now.

McGovern would have been better than Nixon.

Quite seriously, and within my memory: Jimmy Carter.

Yeah right, Jimmy Carter makes Bush look competent. Though I must admit I find his trembling comedy act to be amusing now. Doddering Jimmy being used like a tool for every idiotic cause on the planet is beyond hilarious. *Hands Tremble*

Goldwater.

Teddy Roosevelt against the racist President Wilson

Yeah right, Jimmy Carter makes Bush look competent. Though I must admit I find his trembling comedy act to be amusing now. Doddering Jimmy being used like a tool for every idiotic cause on the planet is beyond hilarious. *Hands Tremble*
Erm, Carter wasn't that bad at all, all things considered. His government was just completely in the midst of the utter disaster caused by OPEC's actions, and this led, unsurprisingly, to things getting worse for a while.

Erm, Carter wasn't that bad at all, all things considered. His government was just completely in the midst of the utter disaster caused by OPEC's actions, and this led, unsurprisingly, to things getting worse for a while.

Despite the fact he tried to destroy the US Military...

Despite the fact he tried to destroy the US Military...
The US has very, very little chance of being invaded. Spending lots of money on the military in the middle of the massive worldwide depression caused by OPEC would have just risen inflation and created even more debt for the US.

Not a good plan.

Anyone wants to know what kind of pathetic prick that Jimmy Carter is, just look at him boycotting the Olympics in 1980.

That was just beyond pathetic. He had a far lower approval rating than Bush ever did, so he boycotts the Olympics before the election because he thinks it actually makes him look like a strong foreign policy leader. That was a Jimmy Carter solution.

Jimmy Carter should be taking his comedy act into Latin America where enough people were hurt because of his weakness.

Despite the fact he tried to destroy the US Military...

I'd vote for that!

*checks citizenship*

damn.

Anyone wants to know what kind of pathetic prick that Jimmy Carter is, just look at him boycotting the Olympics in 1980.

You do realize that this was done due to the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 right?

That was just beyond pathetic. He had a far lower approval rating than Bush ever did, so he boycotts the Olympics before the election because he thinks it actually makes him look like a strong foreign policy leader. That was a Jimmy Carter solution.

Proof of his low approval numbers?

Jimmy Carter should be taking his comedy act into Latin America where enough people were hurt because of his weakness.

Oh brother.

Sure it was. That's why there was a boycott, because of the Soviets, not because Jimmy was a weak tool who was despised by the public, if not the media.

Corneliu, you do your own research. Know about something before you comment on it. It's not hard to research Carter's approval ratings. It's not exactly a secret that they were lower than Nixon's.

Sure it was. That's why there was a boycott, because of the Soviets, not because Jimmy was a weak tool who was despised by the public, if not the media.

Corneliu, you do your own research. Know about something before you comment on it. It's not hard to research Carter's approval ratings.

Yeah, whatever.

So I'm an ignorant aussie. I gave my pick of "best loser of a US presidential election."

Let's hear yours.

Jimmy Carter should be taking his comedy act into Latin America where enough people were hurt because of his weakness.
Oh, because Raegan was an angel there, right?

Nobel, I already said Goldwater. That's not saying much, but at least he had a realistic perspective on a few things. He was one of the few Presidential candidates that ever talked about how ridiculous it was to persecute homosexuals for what they do in the bedroom for example. This was

Reagan was no angel, but he was certainly a much better President than Bush, Clinton, Carter or Ford. Nixon wasn't a bad President.

Corneliu, you do your own research. Know about something before you comment on it. It's not hard to research Carter's approval ratings. It's not exactly a secret that they were lower than Nixon's.

Prove it HSH Prince Eric. Prove that they were lower than Nixons. Prove that they were lower than Bush's.

Nixon wasn't a bad President.

He just ordered the break-in of the Watergate hotel and then tried to cover it up.

Since you are obviously are not someone that knows anything about the era, I'll do one net search for you. That's it, I'm not going to cite every commonly known fact about Jimmy Carter.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcarterJ.htm

"This failed and Carter's approval rating during the summer of 1980 slumped to 21 per cent, the lowest figure ever recorded by a president. "

And when was that Olympic boycott? Hmmm.

Nixon didn't order it, he tried to have it covered up though, which I don't blame him.

And it was a really, really stupid move on their part. McGovern was deservedly humiliated in that election like no other candidate ever and it took something away from that.

Nixon didn't order it, he tried to have it covered up though, which I don't blame him.

Oh brother. :rolleyes:

And it was a really, really stupid move on their part. McGovern was deservedly humiliated in that election like no other candidate ever and it took something away from that.

Yes it was stupid. Even stupider when they tried recorded the whole thing on the Nixon Tapes.

Nobel, I already said Goldwater. That's not saying much, but at least he had a realistic perspective on a long of things. He was one of the few Presidential candidates that ever talked about how ridiculous it was to persecute homosexuals for what they do in the bedroom for example.

Reagan was no angel, but he was certainly a much better President than either Bush, Clinton, Carter or Ford. Nixon wasn't a bad President.

Well there you are then. I'm too ignorant to know what Goldwater stood for, but I noticed Carter and his bleating about human rights. He bleated it from the presidency, after all.

Prove it HSH Prince Eric. Prove that they were lower than Nixons. Prove that they were lower than Bush's.

I'll just leave you two to do your thing. You'll both hate President Clinton II, and I'll be laughing at you both ten years from now.

Since you are obviously are not someone that knows anything about the era, I'll do one net search for you. That's it, I'm not going to cite every commonly known fact about Jimmy Carter.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcarterJ.htm

"This failed and Carter's approval rating during the summer of 1980 slumped to 21 per cent, the lowest figure ever recorded by a president. "

And when was that Olympic boycott? Hmmm.

So basicly you think he did it just to pop up his approval rating then huh?

I'll just leave you two to do your thing. You'll both hate President Clinton II, and I'll be laughing at you both ten years from now.

President Clinton II? :confused: There was only one Clinton Presidency.

It's the reason his popularity got even lower.

Carter was perceived as he was, a weak leader. He actually thought that people would think he was being strong by boycotting the Olympics with the official reason being the Soviet invasion. That was the kind of thinking that he was known for.

It was beyond ridiculous. Punishing athletes for political reasons is just despicable. They are the only ones who were hurt. People that worked their entire lives to go to the Olympics and weren't able to because because Jimmy wanted to look like a tough guy. That's just one example, but anyone that wants to know what kind of prick he was can learn a lot from the boycott alone.

It's the reason his popularity got even lower.

Carter was perceived as he was, a weak leader. He actually thought that people would think he was being strong by boycotting the Olympics with the official reason being the Soviet invasion. That was the kind of thinking that he was known for.

It was beyond ridiculous. Punishing athletes for political reasons is just despicable. They are the only ones who were hurt. People that worked their entire lives to go to the Olympics and weren't able to because because Jimmy wanted to look like a tough guy. That's just one example, but anyone that wants to know what kind of prick he was can learn a lot from the boycott alone.

You think that was the only thing that could have lowered his approval rating? I guess you forgot about the Iranian Hostage Crisis on top of that. so now we have a leader who has to deal with the Iranian Hostage crisis that started in November 1979 as well as the Afghan Invasion which began in December of that same year. Couple that with the economic mess (granted not entirely his fault) and you can see why approval ratings were low.

*Beats head on keyboard*

No, I don't think that's the reason that his approval was so low. I was pointing that out as an example of being a genuine prick.

Yeah right, Jimmy Carter makes Bush look competent. Though I must admit I find his trembling comedy act to be amusing now. Doddering Jimmy being used like a tool for every idiotic cause on the planet is beyond hilarious. *Hands Tremble*

I utterly disagree with you here. GWBush, while not the worst president ever (he's no Andrew Johnston!), certainly qualifies as the worst since at least LBJ, and possibly even worse than FDR. I'll deign to say a few good things about FDR, LBJ, and Carter. At this point in time, I cannot think of even one positive I'd give to GWB, other than he damaged the country less than Grant, Wilson, or Johnston.

Goldwater.

I will agree here.

*Beats head on keyboard*

No, I don't think that's the reason that his approval was so low. I was pointing that out as an example of being a genuine prick.

It was, in reality, the only true political option he had available.

Boycotting the most important international sporting event was the only political option he had to deal with the Soviet invasion? I think not.

It was entirely about his campaign trying to give him a tougher image on foreign policy at the 11th hour and nobody bought it.

It was a disgrace really. Anyone that boycotts the Olympics is a tool and it was the USA and others in this case. Then it was the Soviets turn the next one.

Oddly enough, Carter seems to be best *after* his presidency...

Also, I'm a bit surprised nobody mentioned RFK.

Well there you are then. I'm too ignorant to know what Goldwater stood for, but I noticed Carter and his bleating about human rights. He bleated it from the presidency, after all.



I'll just leave you two to do your thing. You'll both hate President Clinton II, and I'll be laughing at you both ten years from now.

I can understand your jealousy, australia has never been important and never will be.

Don't fret, Kontor -- if a nuclear war breaks out or something, China won't bother sending many nukes your way. Sure, they'd probably fire one at Canberra and one at Sydney, but they'd fire the rest at the US and EU.

I can understand your jealousy, australia has never been important and never will be.

Well, if Australia's not that important I guess that means it's free to pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq.

It was a disgrace really. Anyone that boycotts the Olympics is a tool and it was the USA and others in this case. Then it was the Soviets turn the next one.I love the Simpsons episode dealing with it.

"Don't worry Krusty, we rigged it so the only events that come up are ones which the Warsaw Pact always wins in."

"That's a relief."

"This just came in."

"Soviet boycott of the Olympics! What does this do to the giveaway?"

"You personally stand to lose twenty million dollars."





--------------------------------

Later on:

"I will personally spit in every 50th burger."

Homer: I like those odds.

Al Gore.

No, this thread is asking for the best candidate who lost the election.

Come on, somebody had to say it.

Nixon was a genius, completely without morals or prinicples, but at the same time very, very compentent at most things that make a president work well.

Carter was a lousy president but an exceptional ex-president.

My vote goes for Henry Clay. Any of his five attempts work, but I'm looking at Polk in perticular.

I was playing Hearts of Iron II today, as the Americans. And when the time came to pick an election winner in 1936 I chose Alf Landon rather than Roosevelt.

So I started reading up on the guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alf_Landon), and he wasn't all that bad. He just ran a bad campaign and got his butt kicked on a monumental scale.

So who do you think was the best presidential could-have-been?
Hearts of Iron II huh? I was playing that yesterday...was the Soviet Union and was kicking Germany's ass when they launched Barbarossa. I had them entirely conquered, the surrender event fired, and then...then the game crashed and I lost seven hours of work.

Anyway...lesse...Al Gore, followed by George McGovern, Jimmy Carter...and that's all I can think of at the moment. Teddy Roosevelt, maybe.

Adlai Stevenson.

Ralph nader!

Adlai Stevenson.

Wasn't he a Socialist, or am I mixing up Harry Turtledove's alternate history with reality again?

Wasn't he a Socialist, or am I mixing up Harry Turtledove's alternate history with reality again?

Nope (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adlai_Stevenson).

Nope (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adlai_Stevenson).
Oooh.

Yeah, he'd probably make a good President.

He never got to the election stage, but I'm going to say him anyway.

Bobby Kennedy

Eugene V. Debs.

Eugene V. Debs.

Gotta give him credit for running from his cell.

TR in 1912.

[comedy option]Bob Dole[/comedy option]

I see your Bob Dole and raise you Stephen Colbert

I'm going to second Henry Clay. The Great Compromiser would have done well in the White House.

EDIT: I'd like to add that Samuel Tilden would also have been a good president. He lost a disputed election to Rutherford B. Hayes.

Eugene V. Debs.

Definitely. No one else has ever gotten 900,000 votes for running while your party was effectively illegal and you and the rest of the leadership was in jail for opposing an unjust war. I guess they don't make socialist statesmen like they used to, lol

I don't like to speculate who'd be "better", but I always wondered what happened if William Jennings Bryant won.

Definitely. No one else has ever gotten 900,000 votes for running while your party was effectively illegal and you and the rest of the leadership was in jail for opposing an unjust war. I guess they don't make socialist statesmen like they used to, lol

Source?

William Cullings Brian

If he had won, we would have been able to skip two of the most atrocious wars we have ever fought. Of course he would have to let McKinley win once so he could block Roosevelt on the re-election

Edit: Now that I think about it, without McKinley, Roosevelt wouldn't have won because he wouldn't be a war hero.

Click Stand;13221598']William Cullings Brian

If he had won, we would have been able to skip two of the most atrocious wars we have ever fought. Of course he would have to let McKinley win once so he could block Roosevelt on the re-election

Edit: Now that I think about it, without McKinley, Roosevelt wouldn't have won because he wouldn't be a war hero.

I think you mean William Jennings Bryan.

I don't like to speculate who'd be "better", but I always wondered what happened if William Jennings Bryant won.
Ugh, the guy seems like a left-wing version of George W.

Anyways, the thread is great, because I'm learning stuff.

Oooh.

Yeah, he'd probably make a good President.

Did you read thart article, really? :p

The guy makes me ashamed of being from Illinois, though his excellence in loser-hood kinda negates that, I guess. The guy had the personality of an onion sandwich, and half the wit. But people do like his grandiose speeches and shoes. :p

Source?

Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States. I'm not sure which chapter, but it should be easy enough to find. This is the period of Wilson's Red Scare we're talking about. If you said you were a socialist in public and stumped for your platform, you were very likely to be arrested for violating the Espionage Act (one of those misnamed acts. We have a history of 'em in the US).

Since you are obviously are not someone that knows anything about the era, I'll do one net search for you. That's it, I'm not going to cite every commonly known fact about Jimmy Carter.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcarterJ.htm

"This failed and Carter's approval rating during the summer of 1980 slumped to 21 per cent, the lowest figure ever recorded by a president. "

And when was that Olympic boycott? Hmmm.
Maybe I'm just a silly American, but I always thought that, you know, the hostages the nutcases in Iran had captured the year earlier might have had something to do with his low approval ratings, and not the US not entering the world's biggest sport contest. Just a theory.

As for best could-of-been: my vote goes to Al Gore. There are probably better ones, but he sticks in my mind.
There was a hilarious skit on Saturday Night Live with Al Gore, which you can't find on the Internet thanks to the copyright lawyers of NBC Universal. But you can see the transcript here (http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/algore/a/prezgoresnl.htm).

EDIT: Found it (http://movies.crooksandliars.com/SNL-Al-Gore-5-14.mov)! The picture quality is lousy, but the sound's okay.

Did you read thart article, really? :p

The guy makes me ashamed of being from Illinois, though his excellence in loser-hood kinda negates that, I guess. The guy had the personality of an onion sandwich, and half the wit. But people do like his grandiose speeches and shoes. :p
Considering how much we differ when it comes to political views I'm not surprised you wouldn't agree with me.

Oh, and what two wars were that?

At the time of the Carter Olympic Boycott, I was a mad leftie ... and it enraged me.

It enraged the Soviet Union, too. There was no way for their state-controlled media to pretend that the US athletes were there, no way to strike back other than to boycott in return.

Breaking sporting ties with a country is a very effective protest in my opinion. No children starve, no apartment blocks get bombed, and it hardly costs a cent.

Oh, the poor widdle athletes who don't get their Olympic gold, and the millions in endorsements which seperate them from an equally dedicated athlete who doesn't quite make the team. Honestly!

The very fact that the Soviet Union sacrificed the national pride of gold medals shows how it hurt their pride. If both superpowers used the exact same tactic, surely that shows that it's effective?

Cricket boycotts against South Africa (where cricket was hugely popular among whites) were also effective. Of course, both the Soviet Union and South African Apartheid were overthrown from within, and I'll take no credit away from their people for that -- but in both cases sporting sanctions sent a clear message to the average citizen that we believe you're in the right, your government is corrupt, and we're willing to make sacrifices to support you.

Compare that with Bush I's "We're big and tough and we'll protect you, rise up you Kurds!" and how that turned out.

Power may issue from the barrel of a gun, but moral persuasion sure doesn't.

Considering how much we differ when it comes to political views I'm not surprised you wouldn't agree with me.

Oh, and what two wars were that?

Eh. I was more disagreeing with the other guy, but yeah, Stevenson's name is on everything where I'm from, and without any real justification beside the guy's being born into power and gaining notoriety as a political failure, regardless whether he successfully cracked wise a few times. But I'm sure he had some good points too, and we all love Peter Sellers in Strangelove as old Adlai. :p

As to wars, I don't follow you.

Boycotting the most important international sporting event was the only political option he had to deal with the Soviet invasion? I think not.

Ok smartass! What political option would you have done?

It was entirely about his campaign trying to give him a tougher image on foreign policy at the 11th hour and nobody bought it.

It was a disgrace really. Anyone that boycotts the Olympics is a tool and it was the USA and others in this case. Then it was the Soviets turn the next one.

And that boycott had zero justification. The 1980 boycott had justification.

No, this thread is asking for the best candidate who lost the election.

Come on, somebody had to say it.

Some one did have to say it and your lucky I saw the white text :D

*Beats head on keyboard*

No, I don't think that's the reason that his approval was so low. I was pointing that out as an example of being a genuine prick.

Hell hath no fury like .... :rolleyes:
Couldn't so truly hate without having so truly loved, eh?