The Best US President?

[hts]

Carter betrayed the people of Iran, the people of Ethiopia, handed over Zimbabwe to Mugabe, stabbed Taiwan in the back (there's probably a few more I forgot) and is one of the reasons I can't fully agree with anti-neocons that American isolationism is always a good thing (though support of Islamist "rebels" in Libya and Syria has been a disaster). How many people in non-western countries would have lived and prospered, not to mention have lived under relatively better regimes had Reagan been president at the time instead of Carter?

I guess the Camp David Accords were a success though as Egypt signed peace with Israel, even if they contain references to "Palestine" and stuff.

Because Reagan was known for his fantastic foreign policy record...

Yes, that was a huge scandal, but Reagan is still generally considered(by americans at least) to be a good foreign policy president.

I picked Reagan, despite the fact that I disagree with him quite a bit on certain domestic policies, simply because the US was quite unified under his presidency, (He won 49 States in 84), and he did oversee the largest peacetime economic expansion in US history, plus the demise of the Soviet Union/end of the Cold War. However, how much credit he deserves for both those things is certainly up for discussion.

[jamescfm]

.

[Zanz]

Reagan is still generally considered(by americans at least) to be a good foreign policy president.

Not this American. You don't get my respect as a "good foreign policy president" if you cozy up to Apartheid South Africa, you support Suharto in Indonesia's invasion of East Timor, you pull the bullshit he pulled in Nicaragua and Iran, you orchestrate the invasion of Grenada, you support the mujahidin in Afghanistan, etc., etc... The USSR was collapsing anyway - Reagan gets way too much credit.

EDIT: AND he was wayyyyy too cozy with Margaret Thatcher. Yuck.

[UniSocAll]

Obama (first Presidential elections I could vote in... I went 3rd party) - ACA was a disaster that set real single payer back by a decade or more and helped the insurance companies. Syria, Libya, Yemen are all going to bite us in the ass for ages, Iraq and Afghanistan have gotten progressively worse, and this guy's hailed as a hero. Yuck.

The ACA was the best that could have been passed at that time, and it really doesn't seem like a disaster when 25 million more people are covered, and the increase rate is now steadier than before, so much so that it's not overly surpassing the inflation rate like it did before ACA. It's not perfect, but it's better than what was there before.

His foreign policy are a separate issue, considering that every American president's foreing policy except maybe Carter would be questionable. His inability or unwillingness to close down Guantanamo was also a huge disappointment.

+1. I've also voted 3rd party since 2008. President Obama has been a disaster for African Americans -- hate crimes are through the roof and wealth has been set back a generation and all this clown can muster up is retrograde 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps' sickness like this. It is a testament to the idiocy of the US's anti-African racists and Europhiles that they never seemed to realize how much this guy is his mother's son not his father's son. President Obama is a true blue white pride patriot from stem to stern. His policies in East Africa, Haiti, Europe, and domestically tell the tale.

Are you blaming a rise on hate crimes on Obama? The backlash of a black president is the responsibility of that said President? He's started criminal justice reforms (which was met with heavy resistance, like anything else he has done). What exactly could'/should he have done better?

[Zanz]

Obama (first Presidential elections I could vote in... I went 3rd party) - ACA was a disaster that set real single payer back by a decade or more and helped the insurance companies. Syria, Libya, Yemen are all going to bite us in the ass for ages, Iraq and Afghanistan have gotten progressively worse, and this guy's hailed as a hero. Yuck.

The ACA was the best that could have been passed at that time, and it really doesn't seem like a disaster when 25 million more people are covered, and the increase rate is now steadier than before, so much so that it's not overly surpassing the inflation rate like it did before ACA. It's not perfect, but it's better than what was there before.

His foreign policy are a separate issue, considering that every American president's foreing policy except maybe Carter would be questionable. His inability or unwillingness to close down Guantanamo was also a huge disappointment.

I really hate this "It was the best we could do at the time" shtick. The best wasn't good enough - I will grant that 25 million are covered, and that's a good thing, but that could have been accomplished with something that didn't grant insurance monopolies what is, in effect, an enormous subsidy for covering people they should have been covering already. And "it's not overly surpassing inflation" isn't a win either - it's still surpassing inflation, wages aren't, and people are struggling.

To take a more personal tack - my father makes enough (through two jobs, one self-employed and the other part time) that he doesn't qualify for subsidies. He obviously doesn't have employer-provided options, so he's forced to go on the exchange (in Vermont, where there's only one company providing options), where for two enrollment periods in a row he's seen his premiums rise, and his deductible would bankrupt him if anything were really to go wrong. The subsidies should take into account debt, in my opinion (my dad's income is decent, about $60k before taxes, but he got slammed in a divorce from my mom and owes about $250k for the house he didn't want to lose). In effect he leads a quality of life like he made about $30k, but the ACA doesn't see that. It's a tremendously impersonal approach that just made my dad more and more frustrated.

But it's been "solved," we got "the best we could," if you ask the true believers. The best we could get isn't good enough. Yeah, my dad has coverage, but he'll still be bankrupted by the about $10k deductible if he has a heart attack or colon cancer (both likely in my family), and even if he doesn't, a great deal of any disposable income left to him now goes to premiums every month so that Anthem can write off risk and keep its share prices high (don't get me started on Anthem, who let hackers get my personal info in a data breach). It's disgusting.

[TheTsar]

Why cannot I vote "none of the above"?

[UniSocAll]

Obama (first Presidential elections I could vote in... I went 3rd party) - ACA was a disaster that set real single payer back by a decade or more and helped the insurance companies. Syria, Libya, Yemen are all going to bite us in the ass for ages, Iraq and Afghanistan have gotten progressively worse, and this guy's hailed as a hero. Yuck.

The ACA was the best that could have been passed at that time, and it really doesn't seem like a disaster when 25 million more people are covered, and the increase rate is now steadier than before, so much so that it's not overly surpassing the inflation rate like it did before ACA. It's not perfect, but it's better than what was there before.

His foreign policy are a separate issue, considering that every American president's foreing policy except maybe Carter would be questionable. His inability or unwillingness to close down Guantanamo was also a huge disappointment.

I really hate this "It was the best we could do at the time" shtick. The best wasn't good enough - I will grant that 25 million are covered, and that's a good thing, but that could have been accomplished with something that didn't grant insurance monopolies what is, in effect, an enormous subsidy for covering people they should have been covering already. And "it's not overly surpassing inflation" isn't a win either - it's still surpassing inflation, wages aren't, and people are struggling.

To take a more personal tack - my father makes enough (through two jobs, one self-employed and the other part time) that he doesn't qualify for subsidies. He obviously doesn't have employer-provided options, so he's forced to go on the exchange (in Vermont, where there's only one company providing options), where for two enrollment periods in a row he's seen his premiums rise, and his deductible would bankrupt him if anything were really to go wrong. The subsidies should take into account debt, in my opinion (my dad's income is decent, about $60k before taxes, but he got slammed in a divorce from my mom and owes about $250k for the house he didn't want to lose). In effect he leads a quality of life like he made about $30k, but the ACA doesn't see that. It's a tremendously impersonal approach that just made my dad more and more frustrated.

But it's been "solved," we got "the best we could," if you ask the true believers. The best we could get isn't good enough. Yeah, my dad has coverage, but he'll still be bankrupted by the about $10k deductible if he has a heart attack or colon cancer (both likely in my family), and even if he doesn't, a great deal of any disposable income left to him now goes to premiums every month so that Anthem can write off risk and keep its share prices high (don't get me started on Anthem, who let hackers get my personal info in a data breach). It's disgusting.

Of course you're right that it doesn't come close to what is needed yet, but it's better than what it was before. Do you really think a single-payer bill would have passed Congress? All the maneuvering that Obama had to do to get the bill passed watered it down severely, and for some it hasn't been good at all. Overall, there has been an improvement in healthcare in the US pre and post ACA.

[Zanz]

-snip-

I do grant that things are better for some than they were before ACA - but that's like saying the bailout for AIG, Bank of America, etc., was good because, yeah, we didn't fucking collapse altogether as a result of it. At the end of the day it was still a shitty deal - corporations forced our hands, and yeah, we're not suicidal, but in no way was it OK. Same applies here - insurance companies refused to do their duty and provide necessary services to the most in-need because they represent a risk to profits, and we managed to get them to play along for once... But the cost of getting them to barely play along is too high - we've now got even the left treating healthcare like it's "fixed," like the pure fact that 25 million now have access to basic healthcare is some great accomplishment, and we expended our political capital on a marginal victory. I'd rather have 25 million people openly pissed off at the GOP and the insurance companies for obstructing an actual meaningful shot at single payer that failed, than have 25 million accept shitty second rate expensive care because it represented at least a nominal fulfilment of Obama's promise.

[hts]

Yes, that was a huge scandal, but Reagan is still generally considered(by americans at least) to be a good foreign policy president.

Is he? From what I understand he was pretty dire and a lot of the positive things he did manage, were really the work of HW- who I actually believe to be one of the best foreign policy Presidents, shame it isn't genetic.

I have heard similar things in regards to HW being the real foreign policy decision maker. However, in general it seems to me (it may have something to do with my geographic location and social surroundings) that most people recognize the various foreign policy accomplishments of the Reagan administration and credit these accomplishments to him, even when he may not actually deserve the credit.

I agree about HW Bush by the way, strong foreign policy president. I do not think he gets enough credit, and his son has hurt his image.

Reagan is still generally considered(by americans at least) to be a good foreign policy president.

Not this American. You don't get my respect as a "good foreign policy president" if you cozy up to Apartheid South Africa, you support Suharto in Indonesia's invasion of East Timor, you pull the bullshit he pulled in Nicaragua and Iran, you orchestrate the invasion of Grenada, you support the mujahidin in Afghanistan, etc., etc... The USSR was collapsing anyway - Reagan gets way too much credit.

EDIT: AND he was wayyyyy too cozy with Margaret Thatcher. Yuck.

These are fair criticisms. I like Reagan, but I don't idolize him and make him seem perfect like some hard-righties do. He wasn't perfect, but he was a good president IMO.

[Siggon Kristov]

My views on the ACA are the same as those expressed by Zanz. Disappointed to see a former Comrade defending liberal fuckery.