Quoted from benny salami

A failed attempt by running dog Boxy to divert attention from the current total incompetent.

Benny, this thread has nothing to do with the sitting president, but only those of past administrations.  History will decide their final resting place on the Worst or Best list.

As for Obama, his book is only half (or 1/4) written.  His best, or worst may be yet to come.

My ranking for potential best presidential candidates:

1. DVOR
2. DMOR
3. Whomever DMOR is today
4. Whomever DMOR claims not to be tomorrow
5. Any DMOR/DVOR alias

I gave Reagan a lower ranking mainly due to the fact that he really screwed Social Security by bringing it "on budget" and thus allowing future Congresses and Presidents to mask the true federal budget deficit.

I was almost going to put Gerald Ford in #1 position --- for this reason --- given the State of the Union (Watergate, withdrawal of troops from Vietnam, Oil Crisis and Economic problems) when he assumed office on August 9, 1974 .... he did manage these crises well and by July 4, 1976 .. we were feeling more united and optimistic as a nation.  

I have always admired the man from Grand Rapids.  He was a great public servant.

Quoted from DemocraticVoiceOfReason

I gave Reagan a lower ranking mainly due to the fact that he really screwed Social Security by bringing it "on budget" and thus allowing future Congresses and Presidents to mask the true federal budget deficit.

I was almost going to put Gerald Ford in #1 position --- for this reason --- given the State of the Union (Watergate, withdrawal of troops from Vietnam, Oil Crisis and Economic problems) when he assumed office on August 9, 1974 .... he did manage these crises well and by July 4, 1976 .. we were feeling more united and optimistic as a nation.  

I have always admired the man from Grand Rapids.  He was a great public servant.

I couldn't disagree more.  I liked Ford as a politician,  but any president who followed, and pardoned Nixon would suffer the wrath of the voters.
I remember those times well... Cambodia was still at war (remember the Mayagüez hostages?)... the country had no confidence in their govt, and so elected an outsider Jimmy Carter.  The cold war was still raging, China was preparing to invaded Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge began to kill millions... not a very peaceful time for anyone to be president.

Ford was a good man, and, like Obama, he was handed an almost impossible task.  He did well under the circumstances.

Quoted from Box A Rox

Ron Paul is an anti war Republican.  He has NO support in congress, so his election promises are worth nothing.  He can't pass anything with out the Republicans in congress.

You're right, he can't pass anything, and he has no support from the RINO's in Congress...AND THAT IS A GOOD THING!!!!  What he CAN DO is veto any legislation that expands the federal government and force the congress to get enough votes to OVERRIDE his veto.  What he can do is appoint federal judges.  What he can do is reign in rouge departments in the executive branch like the EPA and deregulate.  The president has the bully pulpit and points the country in a philosophical direction.  Which Paul's would be individualism, liberty, and free market competition.  Not collectivism and central planning, which is what the current Democrat and Republican Parties are believers in.  

Paul's philosophy is the answer to our nations woes, all the rest of these candidates are just giving nuanced answer that will perpetuate more of the same governance of the last 100 years.

Quoted from CICERO

You're right, he can't pass anything, and he has no support from the RINO's in Congress...AND THAT IS A GOOD THING!!!!  What he CAN DO is veto any legislation that expands the federal government and force the congress to get enough votes to OVERRIDE his veto.  What he can do is appoint federal judges.  What he can do is reign in rouge departments in the executive branch like the EPA and deregulate.  The president has the bully pulpit and points the country in a philosophical direction.  Which Paul's would be individualism, liberty, and free market competition.  Not collectivism and central planning, which is what the current Democrat and Republican Parties are believers in.  

Paul's philosophy is the answer to our nations woes, all the rest of these candidates are just giving nuanced answer that will perpetuate more of the same governance of the last 100 years.

WOW!  Read the old testament... Ron Paul (for some on this board) IS the Messiah!  But just on this board... in the real world, Ron Paul will lose the Republican Nomination and if he runs as an independent with any $$$ behind him, Ron Paul will guarantee that Barack Hussein Obama will win reelection.

Quoted from Box A Rox

WOW!  Read the old testament... Ron Paul (for some on this board) IS the Messiah!  But just on this board... in the real world, Ron Paul will lose the Republican Nomination and if he runs as an independent with any $$$ behind him, Ron Paul will guarantee that Barack Hussein Obama will win reelection.

Not a Messiah, just a mere mortal man, principled and committed to following the Constitution and returning individual liberty.  

He's not running on HOPE and CHANGE while receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from Wall Street and Defense(weapons) Contractors.

Quoted from Box A Rox

I couldn't disagree more.  I liked Ford as a politician,  but any president who followed, and pardoned Nixon would suffer the wrath of the voters.
I remember those times well... Cambodia was still at war (remember the Mayagüez hostages?)... the country had no confidence in their govt, and so elected an outsider Jimmy Carter.  The cold war was still raging, China was preparing to invaded Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge began to kill millions... not a very peaceful time for anyone to be president.

Ford was a good man, and, like Obama, he was handed an almost impossible task.  He did well under the circumstances.

The 1976 presidential campaign was the first that I followed from start to finish (although I proudly wore an All The Way with LBJ button to school in late 1967 and early 196 -- it was particularly memorable as myself and a few fellow high school students formed a Young Democrats Club at our school in Michigan.  We were greatly outnumbered by Republicans at the school -- but our membership was more than the current active Republicans in Rotterdam,

I would NOT say that the election result showed a lack of confidence in President Ford or any great sense of confidence in Jimmy Carter.   The numbers speak for themselves:
     Carter carried 23 states + DC with 50% of the total popular vote for 297 electoral votes
     Ford carried 27 states with 48% of the total popular vote for 240 electoral votes
In 20 of the states the margin between Ford and Carter was less than 5%.   That includes New York where a Democrat should have won much more convincingly  and Ohio which went for Carter by barely a quarter of1% of the votes cast.   Had Ford carried Ohio - he would have been elected to a full 4 year term.

Personally, I think that Ford's decision to pardon Nixon was the absolutely right thing to do.  It allowed the White House and the nation to take its attention away from the distraction of Watergate and focus on the many domestic and international problems that needed to be addressed.  

As for Vietnam and Southeast Asia, the war and that region was lost LONG BEFORE Mr. Ford took office.  I blame McNamara and Cronkite for our losing the war in Southeast Asia.   Both were cowardly traitors IMHO -- one by lying to, misleading and giving bad advise to President Johnson and the other for using his nightly news show to shill for the anti-war crowd and the enemies of America.  

All in all, I believe Jerry Ford did a tremendous job with the difficult hand that was dealt him. He deserves credit for doing a fine job and should rank among the top presidents of ALL times -- not just of the last 50 years.

Quoted from Box A Rox

I couldn't disagree more.  I liked Ford as a politician,  but any president who followed, and pardoned Nixon would suffer the wrath of the voters.
I remember those times well... Cambodia was still at war (remember the Mayagüez hostages?)... the country had no confidence in their govt, and so elected an outsider Jimmy Carter.  The cold war was still raging, China was preparing to invaded Vietnam, the Khmer Rouge began to kill millions... not a very peaceful time for anyone to be president.

Ford was a good man, and, like Obama, he was handed an almost impossible task.  He did well under the circumstances.

The 1976 presidential campaign was the first that I followed from start to finish (although I proudly wore an All The Way with LBJ button to school in late 1967 and early 196 -- it was particularly memorable as myself and a few fellow high school students formed a Young Democrats Club at our school in Michigan.  We were greatly outnumbered by Republicans at the school -- but our membership was more than the current active Republicans in Rotterdam,

I would NOT say that the election result showed a lack of confidence in President Ford or any great sense of confidence in Jimmy Carter.   The numbers speak for themselves:
     Carter carried 23 states + DC with 50% of the total popular vote for 297 electoral votes
     Ford carried 27 states with 48% of the total popular vote for 240 electoral votes
In 20 of the states the margin between Ford and Carter was less than 5%.   That includes New York where a Democrat should have won much more convincingly  and Ohio which went for Carter by barely a quarter of1% of the votes cast.   Had Ford carried Ohio - he would have been elected to a full 4 year term.

Personally, I think that Ford's decision to pardon Nixon was the absolutely right thing to do.  It allowed the White House and the nation to take its attention away from the distraction of Watergate and focus on the many domestic and international problems that needed to be addressed.  

As for Vietnam and Southeast Asia, the war and that region was lost LONG BEFORE Mr. Ford took office.  I blame McNamara and Cronkite for our losing the war in Southeast Asia.   Both were cowardly traitors IMHO -- one by lying to, misleading and giving bad advise to President Johnson and the other for using his nightly news show to shill for the anti-war crowd and the enemies of America.  

All in all, I believe Jerry Ford did a tremendous job with the difficult hand that was dealt him. He deserves credit for doing a fine job and should rank among the top presidents of ALL times -- not just of the last 50 years.

DDDDDoubke PPPPosting  Cuz I DDDDon't NNNNNo how to UUUUUUSSSEEEEE CCCCComputers....

A$s clown man boy.

Figures he supported that war monger LBJ. All the kids were for Gene McCarthy. That was the last DEM you could trust.

I believe LBJ was one of the most effective presidents that we ever had --- the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Act ... the Great Society ... investments in science and technology through NASA and other agencies.  

IT'S JUST PURE ANGER OUT THERE....and no head is safe...

despite all the rage we are still just rats in a cage

Richard Nixon deserves a high rating because of the many pieces of domestic legislation passed during his presidency -- including the environmental legislation of the early 1970's -- and of course -- because of his "breaking the ice" by visiting the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China  .. and the other foreign policy successes of his presidency.

Personally, I think Watergate was blown out of proportion --- the break-in was just John Dean's sorry attempt to destroy evidence gathered about his hooker/stripper wife.   Watching him testify before the Ervin Committee,I could tell that John Dean was just a weaselly, conniving back-stabber who fabricated a story and perjured himself by throwing his superiors (including his president) "under the bus".