What makes a good President?

[Red Memories]

So I think a majority of us agree Trump is not the best President, but I wonder, what really defines a good President? Because in previous times through history I've also seen President that sounded "good" to infact be considered terrible.

Is it strictly about how well they follow your idea of policy?
Is it about how long their work lasts without them?
Is it about what they change?

While I do not like Trump, I also did not think Obama was this beam of greatness. To be clear, he was not terrible, but he felt more like just a pop culture president rather than a real one. Growing up I've heard nothing but good things about Ronald Reagan only to hear him trashed elsewhere these days, although my grandpa points out Bill Clinton nixed a lot of his work. I think most can agree Bush was a terrible president.

But historically speaking even, is there a President "GOOD" to anyone? I had a social work textbook put down Abraham Lincoln, and he ended slavery? I also do not think we should assume a President was bad necessarily if they say something, well in today's language "cancellable" but in their time that was, different. It was a different time, different era. We do not have to find it okay, but we do not have to discredit what good they did either.

I am speaking as someone who sees all the hatred and wonders, what exactly is enough for people? I am curious also if you have personal favorites and what they did that actually stood out to you. How was it different? Maybe why you view a popular president as possibly not that great?

I am eager to see the feedback to this thread.

 

[Nicodemus]

Interesting thread. I have to think about it.

Perhaps we can add top 3 or top 5 lists of US presidents to illustrate who we think best exemplified our book of criteria.

 

[Swivelinglight]

1. Washington ofc
2. FDR
3. John Adams / Eisenhower / Lyndon B Johnson / Lincoln (hard to pick third)

 

[Deprecator]

So I think a majority of us agree Trump is not the best President

In general, psychology sites tend to sway overwhelmingly left, and as such they've essentially created echo chambers where the same criticisms of the president are nonsensically parroted, and all regardless of the facts at hand. On a larger scale this criticism represents an electorate minority (especially considering that the foreigners here tend to be among the most vocal critics of Trump), and yet even despite these pretentious outbursts, within Trump's own party he has still garnered unprecedented popularity and support, and consistently stands as an overwhelming favorite to win 2020.

To be clear, he was not terrible, but he felt more like just a pop culture president rather than a real one.

He was black, and this meant that the left got to feel warm and fuzzy because they supported him, and anyone who dared criticize any of his policies were merely the victims of their own unconscious bias (my favorite was when Joe Wilson called Obama a liar during a speech and he was subsequently branded a racist). Regardless though, I still think it's interesting when we compare Obama's rhetoric to that of our modern Democratic front runners.

History will be the true judge of what makes a good president, and in my opinion I think Trump, Washington and Lincoln will go down as the greatest.

 

[Virtual ghost]

It is fundamentally pretty simple. (in my book)


1. Good instinct for picking the staff (which will do most of the actual work)
2. Good catalyst between people, staff, experts etc.
3. Has a sense for fairness and morals.
4. Knows when it is time for by the book solutions and when the book just isn't enough
5. Knows how global order works, what is vital for the context in which decisions are made.
6. Financially reasonable under circumstances (regardless of what they really are)

 

[Red Memories]

1. Washington ofc
2. FDR
3. John Adams / Eisenhower / Lyndon B Johnson / Lincoln (hard to pick third)

Do you have some reasons you chose the people in the list that you chose?

- - - Updated - - -

It is fundamentally pretty simple. (in my book)


1. Good instinct for picking the staff (which will do most of the actual work)
2. Good catalyst between people, staff, experts etc.
3. Has a sense for fairness and morals.
4. Knows when it is time for by the book solutions and when the book just isn't enough
5. Knows how global order works, what is vital for the context in which decisions are made.
6. Financially reasonable under circumstances (regardless of what they really are)

Do you know any leaders who would be a good example of following this? past or present?

 

[Red Memories]

In general, psychology sites tend to sway overwhelmingly left, and as such they've essentially created echo chambers where the same criticisms of the president are nonsensically parroted, and all regardless of the facts at hand. On a larger scale this criticism represents an electorate minority (especially considering that the foreigners here tend to be among the most vocal critics of Trump), and yet even despite these pretentious outbursts, within Trump's own party he has still garnered unprecedented popularity and support, and consistently stands as an overwhelming favorite to win 2020.


He was black, and this meant that the left got to feel warm and fuzzy because they supported him, and anyone who dared criticize any of his policies were merely the victims of their own unconscious bias (my favorite was when Joe Wilson called Obama a liar during a speech and he was subsequently branded a racist). Regardless though, I still think it's interesting when we compare Obama's rhetoric to that of our modern Democratic front runners.

History will be the true judge of what makes a good president, and in my opinion I think Trump, Washington and Lincoln will go down as the greatest.

I feel that the internet as a whole can become an echo chamber very easily. I like to educate myself on both sides. I personally consider myself someone more center, leaning slightly left. But on issues such as the border I am quite conservative.

I hear a lot of people online screaming how you should feel or what you should think, but few are giving rational or having a discuss. I feel like this is a great sort of open forum to say "what makes a good president?" and then perhaps this would be a better place to have a conversation of what should matter. Obviously we all have policies we'd like to see or not see but voting is also a compromise in itself.

Gonna check out the video though, as Obama is quite tame compared to some of these modern ones. XD
video checks out, he definitely sounds more tame. XD

I think we'll see how Trump goes. Personally, I think he'd probably do better if he'd let his pride disappear and GET OFF TWITTER. Just be quiet for a while... He comes off very ignorant at times and in a crisis like now it is harder and harder to just not want to...well deck him.

I think the other issue is as well, most people I knew who criticized the Trump election did not even go vote. My grandpa told me I cannot complain about who is in charge unless I voted to put a person in charge. I feel like this is a great commentary to encourage voting too...if you are not going to participate when you can...you are part of the reason they are there in office. You didn't exercise your power to prevent it...

Appreciate your commentary nevertheless.

 

[Tellenbach]

My criteria:

1. Knows his Constitutional role and accepts it. This is a Constitutional Republic, not some socialist dictatorship. FDR failed miserably with this one.
2. Loves the people and the nation. This is why Hillary sucked as a candidate; she labeled 40% of the electorate as "deplorable". This is why Reagan was so beloved.
3. Strong leadership. In times of crises, we need a strong leader to inspire and calm the people. Reagan, George W. Bush, and Trump are examples of strong leaders. Obama, Ford, LBJ, Bush Sr, and Carter were all mediocre to weak leaders.

 

[Lark]

Lawful Good.

As with most other things but especially positions of responsibility and leadership.

Now if you could get a lawful good ESTJ that would be awesome.

Presidents from the past that I've liked are mainly Theodore Roosevelt, I think he was the last one, bar FDR, who actually stood up to big trusts and monopolies and wasnt just some sort of crook aiming to play the public for their paymasters.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

He was black, and this meant that the left got to feel warm and fuzzy because they supported him, and anyone who dared criticize any of his policies were merely the victims of their own unconscious bias (my favorite was when Joe Wilson called Obama a liar during a speech and he was subsequently branded a racist). Regardless though, I still think it's interesting when we compare Obama's rhetoric to that of our modern Democratic front runners.
st.

Many people have the tendency to view the office of the Presidency as some sacrosanct holy office that should not be criticized when, and only when, the fella they voted for is in charge. When the shoe is on the other foot, they go on and on about how dissent is patriotic and the Constitution, blah blah, and "tea parties" and "resistance."

It's infuriating, and makes political discourse incredibly difficult to take seriously. Of course, by some freak chance Sanders gets the presidency, all his opponents should go to gulag.

 

[Red Memories]

My criteria:

1. Knows his Constitutional role and accepts it. This is a Constitutional Republic, not some socialist dictatorship. FDR failed miserably with this one.
2. Loves the people and the nation. This is why Hillary sucked as a candidate; she labeled 40% of the electorate as "deplorable". This is why Reagan was so beloved.
3. Strong leadership. In times of crises, we need a strong leader to inspire and calm the people. Reagan, George W. Bush, and Trump are examples of strong leaders. Obama, Ford, LBJ, Bush Sr, and Carter were all mediocre to weak leaders.

Might I ask what made George W. Bush a strong leader? I was just a wee lad when he was the president, but I've honestly never heard anything positive of him because of the war in Iraq. I do feel Obama struggled as a leader as he failed to calm and bring people together in crisis, and frankly I always felt like he was saying the same speech over and over like a robot on tv. But maybe all presidents do that. XD

How would you rework what FDR did to keep it in line with your train of thought?

 

[Red Memories]

Lawful Good.

As with most other things but especially positions of responsibility and leadership.

Now if you could get a lawful good ESTJ that would be awesome.

Presidents from the past that I've liked are mainly Theodore Roosevelt, I think he was the last one, bar FDR, who actually stood up to big trusts and monopolies and wasnt just some sort of crook aiming to play the public for their paymasters.

Could you explain lawful good? I do not know much about these kinds of descriptions.

 

[Nicodemus]

My criteria:

1. Knows his Constitutional role and accepts it. This is a Constitutional Republic, not some socialist dictatorship. FDR failed miserably with this one.
2. Loves the people and the nation. This is why Hillary sucked as a candidate; she labeled 40% of the electorate as "deplorable". This is why Reagan was so beloved.
3. Strong leadership. In times of crises, we need a strong leader to inspire and calm the people. Reagan, George W. Bush, and Trump are examples of strong leaders. Obama, Ford, LBJ, Bush Sr, and Carter were all mediocre to weak leaders.

For future reference: Competence and wisdom are, unsurprisingly, irrelevant to Tellenbach.

 

[Red Memories]

Many people have the tendency to view the office of the Presidency as some sacrosanct holy office that should not be criticized when, and only when, the fella they voted for is in charge. When the shoe is on the other foot, they go on and on about how dissent is patriotic and the Constitution, blah blah, and "tea parties" and "resistance."

It's infuriating, and makes political discourse incredibly difficult to take seriously. Of course, by some freak chance Sanders gets the presidency, all his opponents should go to gulag.

I am gonna say personally despite all the drama it can create, one of the wonderful things about America is our freedom to say what we think. In other countries, if you speak against your leader, yeah I'm sure there is a gulag. While dissenters can be annoying, they are exercising their free right. Nevertheless, I hope we never get to a point where people are imprisoned for saying they don't like what so and so did.

I certainly dislike the way a lot of political discourse goes as well though. We have too many who do exactly as you spoke of. I hate it also because I cannot gain anything from the conversation. If we're going to discuss such difficult topics, I want to gain something from it, whether it just be some knowledge or something that actually changes my point of view on the entire thing. But people just scream at each other now instead. It's pathetic.

 

[Tellenbach]

Might I ask what made George W. Bush a strong leader?

He did a masterful job after the 9/11 attacks. He brought calm to a bunch of people who were terrified.

How would you rework what FDR did to keep it in line with your train of thought?

He's a strong leader, but he was also probably a racist (he devestated black workers by supporting unions and instituting wage controls), a socialist, and he misused government resources for political gain. The vast majority of the New Deal money went to swing states; he was using tax dollars to win re-election. Obama did the same with the "stimulus" package.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Do you know any leaders who would be a good example of following this? past or present?

Well, I placed the bar pretty high and therefore there probably aren't too many cases or example that fit the profile 100% of the time.
My bet would be one of those people that history remembers as great and successful reformers.

 

[ceecee]

He did a masterful job after the 9/11 attacks. He brought calm to a bunch of people who were terrified.



He's a strong leader, but he was also probably a racist (he devestated black workers by supporting unions and instituting wage controls), a socialist, and he misused government resources for political gain. The vast majority of the New Deal money went to swing states; he was using tax dollars to win re-election. Obama did the same with the "stimulus" package.

I had no idea Kentucky was a swing state.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

He did a masterful job after the 9/11 attacks. He brought calm to a bunch of people who were terrified.

.

Dubya is the reason why we have ISIS, as well as the largest refugee crisis since WWII, and also turned a surplus into a deficit (and no, you can't just blame that all on 9/11).

Until this year, I'd considered him a worse President than Trump (which seemed to bother a lot of people). The business with Iran and his handling of the virus situation has caused them to flip in my rankings.

 

[Tellenbach]

Dubya is the reason why we have ISIS, as well as the largest refugee crisis since WWII, and also turned a surplus into a deficit (and no, you can't just blame that all on 9/11).

I never said Dubya was a great president; I said he was a strong leader. There is a difference. Given what we know about Democrats, nation building of any kind is a mistake. You can't have a Republican administration take out a strongman like Saddam and then have Obama quit and leave behind a defenseless Iraqi population. ISIS ran over Iraq and killed/raped lots of people because Obama took out American security forces.

 

[Vendrah]

Just to make sure of: It doesnt need to be an US president, but rather any country´s president, right?