あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]sealjosh 427ポイント428ポイント  (83子コメント)

George W: cool dude, terrible president.

[–]neighborlyglove 104ポイント105ポイント  (23子コメント)

I'm not defending Bush's presidency, but I don't know if there can be a good president anymore. Maybe they're only good looking back from a distance.

[–]SmartToaster 53ポイント54ポイント  (17子コメント)

And you have to wonder, was there ever a good president? I mean, this country used to have a lot of blind nationalism. Plus we just trusted people more and that's probably because we didn't know as much as we do now.

[–]typicaliconoclast 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

The short answer is yes. Don't confuse good with perfect. There have been good presidents who made mistakes and had bad things happen under their watch.

[–]nmorozov -4ポイント-3ポイント  (13子コメント)

Carter. He was a responsible dude trying to run the country. As a perk, he was the perfect president to deal with three mile island.

[–]abk006 40ポイント41ポイント  (9子コメント)

Double-digit inflation? 50% increase in the federal deficit? Lines at the gas pumps?

There's a reason Reagan got 90% of the electoral votes in 1980.

[–]nmorozov 13ポイント14ポイント  (1子コメント)

The Federal Reserve doesn't report to the president. Carter inherited an economy trying to recover from a recession, and the Federal reserve was jacking around interest rates in a vaguely psychotic manner.

OPEC was flipping out because of Israel. I'm not saying Carter was flawless, but you can't act like those things happened solely due to his choices.

[–]GODDAMNFOOL 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

Are you kidding? Everything that happens in this country is the president's fault.

Your land values have fallen because your neighbor's house burned down after their meth lab malfunctioned? Thanks, Obama.

[–]IHaveStupidOpinions 14ポイント15ポイント  (5子コメント)

Here's a book that explains how Carter, much like Obama, inherited a crumbling economy and ended up taking the blame for it from people who didn't know any better (or didn't care to do any research or analysis).

http://estore.archives.gov/Carter/ProductInfo/C1008.aspx

[–]tootoohi1 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Except Obama was dealt a shit hand, yet things will be better than worse after he leaves.

[–]fido5150 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Reagan won on pretty much a single issue: the hostages.

The fact that American Citizens had been held hostage in Iran for over a year, and Carter had bungled the rescue attempt, was what sunk him. The Iranian Oil Embargo came out of that event, because it would be pretty shitty to give monetary support directly to a country that was holding our citizens hostage, eh?

Then the Carter Administration was getting close to a deal with the Iranian captors, but the Reagan camp met with the Iranians and urged them to hold off until after Reagan was sworn into office, because they'd have a much more sympathetic administration in place (plus it would be an immediate feather in his cap). So they did.

And the best part, the Iranians released the hostages on Reagan's Inauguration Day. Talk about a sucker punch. What should have been a day dedicated to talking about our new president instead became all about the hostages being released. It was like "Ronald Reagan who?". Nobody ever investigated how suspicious that was though. Weird.

This was also the beginning of the whole Iran/Contra affair, his first day in office.

[–]TinderSafety 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think you're forgetting how closely tied to Pol Pot Carter was, and he was instrumental in ensuring the ousted Khmer Rouge remained Cambodia's foreign representatives in the UN despite, you know, being kicked out of their country for being brutal despots.

But, no, you're right, Carter was a saint /s

[–]PitchBlackCreed -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Carter is one of the worst along with Obama. You seem like your blind.

[–]SexyTaft -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

He's history's greatest monster!

[–]nednerbf -5ポイント-4ポイント  (3子コメント)

A two party system is only one more then communism.

The biggest problem is, its the parties themselves that chooses who gets to run for them, and do you think the parties would ever let someone get into power who would really be able to change their status quo?

The parties get to dictate to us who they think is suitable for us to vote for. That seems shady to me.

[–]RossPerotVan 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

There's almost always an independent candidate. It's just hardly anyone votes for them.

[–]MaxNanasy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Which makes it a de facto two-party system

[–]ussbaney 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lol that ain't communism. Thats just called a one-party state.

[–]superslayer44 111ポイント112ポイント  (39子コメント)

George W may be a cool dude, but Clinton was a "C-ha-ha-hooooool Duuuuuuuude"

[–]Kongo204 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

Unfortunately it's part of why he got elected. He's the kind of guy you'd want to sit down for a beer with.

[–]retrospects 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dub is cool af. He will show up to Rangers games from time to time.