glum perspective from a glum burg
i'll put here links to other sites i find interesting, as well as the occasional rant.
About carlalafong


Real Name:
carla lafong
Member Since:
September 05, 2006
Last Signed In:
April 28, 2008
Profile Views:
3029
Blog Views:
5232
View Profile
Send a Message
Send To A Friend
Sign Guestbook
Add as a Friend

Previous Posts
bill moyers interviews rev. wright
an oldie but goodie & pete seeger, great patriot
public schools, public schools
Who will get your vote? ... Are you sure???
brussel sprouts and bush
THE MEANING OF LIFE
lone star oldie-goody (pg-13 content, maybe)
the founding immigrants
rev. sharpton quotes from today's californian
The Self-Taught Gardener Reflects
Archives
September 06
October 06
November 06
December 06
January 07
February 07
March 07
April 07
May 07
June 07
July 07
August 07
September 07
October 07
November 07
December 07
January 08
February 08
March 08
April 08
May 08
June 08
July 08
August 08
September 08
Subscribe!
RSS 2.0 feed RSS 2.0
Add to My Yahoo
Add to My Google
Add to Bloglines
Add to My AOL

Share!


carlalafong - > glum perspective from a glum burg -> presidents, best to worst
presidents, best to worst

this is certainly interesting...

Which U.S. presidents of the past 50 years will be remembered as best and worst? Two opinions are presented below.

Ratings: 4= A; 3=B; C=2; D=1; 0=F

Abbreviations: JFK= kennedy; LBJ= johnson; RN=nixon; GF=ford; JC=carter; RR=reagan; GB=bush the elder; BC=clinton; GW=bush the younger

I.

U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTABILITY FACTORS:

1. WEALTH/CAMPAIGN COFFERS:  Recent presidents have been born with silver spoons in their mouths except Reagan (2) and Clinton (1). Clinton is the only president of the past 50 years to have had lower-middle class origins and to have worked his way up to the presidency (he got “in” early in life, though, due to unusual determination and brains).

2. FAME PRIOR TO ELECTION : All have been prominently in the spotlight prior to election, though Ford gets a 3 for being in the shadow of Nixon.

3. NAME RECOGNITION PRIOR TO ELECTION: Carter and Clinton get 3s

4. SILVER SPOON STATUS: Most  presidents have been born rich to filthy rich, but Carter gets a 3 for being from a farming family; Reagan a 3 for accruing his wealth via acting-to-politics; and Clinton a 2 for being born poor and having to work his way up.

5. HEIGHT/STATURE: The taller guy usually wins, unless the shorter guy is younger/better looking, and then he may win. Looks and height are ever increasingly more important:  JFK= 6’1”=4; LBJ=6’4”=4; RN=5’11”=3; GF=6’=3; JC=5’9”=1; RR=6’1”=4; GB=6’2”=4; BC=6’2”=4; GW=5’11”=3

6. GOOD LOOKS/SMILE/CHARM: JFK= 4; LBJ= 2; RN=1; GF=2; JC=3; RR=3; GB=2; BC=4; GW=3 (in the eyes of some, that is; many supporters think he’s the hippest, a real rogue, mister cool)

7. SMEAR TACTICS/EXPERT-AT-DOUBLESPEAK SUPPORT STAFF WITH TV & PRINT MEDIA CONNECTIONS: Speech writers, campaign team, and cabinet are increasingly important to the modern president. These support people must be able to convince “the American public” that black is white, that night is day, that a draft dodger is the real patriot when running against a decorated veteran. Without his savvy lackeys, the president is nothing (witness the current downfall of Bush the Younger):

JFK= 3; LBJ= 2; RN=4; GF=2; JC=1; RR=4; GB=3; BC=3; GW=4

8. SLICK AS SNOT/WINING & DINING/SCHMOOZING ABILITIES: Beyond being merely charming and dynamic, the modern president increasingly must be manipulative and able to wrap all people around his finger, even if he must lie to do so. Winning is everything:

JFK= 3; LBJ= 3; RN=3; GF=1; JC=1; RR=4; GB=2; BC=4; GW=4

FINAL ELECTABILITY SCORES (with presidents ranked): JFK= 30 (A); GW=30 (A); RR=28 (A-); GB=27 (A-); LBJ= 27 (B); RN=27 (B); B C=25 (B-); GF=23 (C); JC=20 (D).

Electability Analysis: When using the above U.S. electability measures of wealth, fame, movie star looks, smear campaigns, and slickness, we see that Jimmy Carter came out dead last and therefore, along with Abraham Lincoln, would never be elected president if he ran today. Bill Clinton also scores low because, although he exhibits good looks and slickness, he was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Therefore, it seems, his election to two terms was some kind of fluke, since the office increasingly is awarded to the born-into-it stinking rich.

Clearly on top are John F. Kennedy, possessor of legacy, wealth and good looks, and George W. Bush, who although not nearly as good-looking, bright, or authentically charismatic, pulled ahead due to a strong support staff of smear-tactic experts as well as his own personal Texannecticut charm and ability to say and force into reality anything to accomplish what he needs.

II.

PRESIDENTIAL LEGACY (During the President’s term, these qualities may be perhaps only 10 percent important, obscured as they are by the president’s wealth, fame, and control of visual and print media. However, as the years and decades go by, the President’s legacy – how he will be remembered for his true knowledge of issues; decisive, honorable actions; personal character; and vision for all regardless of class -- becomes increasingly apparent. Sometimes, however, the legacy begins to manifest itself while the president is still in office, as is happening currently to Bush the Younger.)

1. DOMESTIC AFFAIRS KNOWLEDGE: JFK= 4; LBJ= 4; RN=4; GF=3; JC=4; RR=3; GB=4; BC=4; GW=2

2. FOREIGN POLICY KNOWLEDGE: JFK= 4; LBJ= 4; RN=4; GF=3; JC=4; RR=3; GB=4; BC=4; GW=1

3. COMPASSIONATE, CIRCUMSPECT, DECISIVE ACTION – DOMESTIC: JFK= 4; LBJ= 4; RN=1; GF=3; JC=4; RR=2; GB=2; BC=4; GW=1

4. COMPASSIONATE, CIRCUMSPECT, DECISIVE ACTION – FOREIGN: JFK= 3; LBJ= 3; RN=3; GF=3; JC=2; RR=3; GB=3; BC=3; GW=1

5. INTELLECT: JFK= 4; LBJ= 3; RN=4; GF=3; JC=4; RR=2; GB=4; BC=4; GW=1

6. HONESTY & INTEGRITY: JFK= 4; LBJ= 4; RN=1; GF=4; JC=4; RR=3; GB=3; BC=1; GW=1

7. OVERALL LEGACY: JFK= 4; LBJ= 3; RN=1; GF=3; JC=3; RR=3; GB=3; BC=3; GW=1

FINAL LEGACY SCORES (with presidents ranked): JFK= 27 (A); LBJ= 25 (A-); JC=25 (A-); GB=23 (B); BC=23 (B); GF=22 (B-);  RR=19 (C-); RN=18 (D); GW=8 (F)

ANALYSIS: Using the preceding measures and ratings, JFK will be remembered as the top president of the past 50 years. Following him will be his predecessor, LBJ, as well as Jimmy Carter, who although perceived as weak during his presidency, since has proved himself to be an important peace-maker, man of productive action, and unifier.

Reagan, called “the Great Communicator” in his time, ultimately will be remembered as a genial actor and man lost to Alzheimer’s whose top-down policies resulted in a worsened classism and stratification of American society.

Ironically, Bush the Elder’s legacy has been strengthened by the damage done by his comparatively weak-minded and impulsive son. Clinton, disgraced by personal and financial scandal while in office, also will look better historically when compared to GW, Clinton never having blackened America’s world reputation with pre-emptive strike, stripping of personal liberties, torture of prisoners, and too-little-too-late indifference to domestic disasters such as Katrina. Bush the Younger, like Clinton, never served in the Armed Forces, unlike Clinton protected from inscription by the privilege of his wealthy family, yet sent and continues to send thousands to death in battle.

At bottom with George W. Bush is Nixon, brilliant thinker felled by lack of empathy and Watergate, but G.W. is dead last, being  the “Resident Non-Elect,” unrepentant alcoholic and drug addict, wealthy frat-boy and draft dodger, Texan imposter, a man inauthentic in so many ways. Like the director of  “The Passion of the Christ,” Bush seems to be that particularly arrogant, self-righteous, and compulsive type, the alcoholic who stops drinking and then shuns support, running on self-will, impulsivity and might makes right. However, the director is only an annoyance to read about in tabloids when he drinks again, makes ugly statements, and falls embarrassingly before our very eyes, whereas the current president not only annoys and infuriates, but turns the whole world against the United States, blithely thumbing his nose at all who disagree with him.

CONCLUSION: JFK will be remembered, head and shoulders above others, as the greatest president of the last 50 years. George W. Bush will be remembered, head and shoulder below all others, as the worst. 

 

Posted in these Groups:
Topics: presidents, Politics, bush, clinton, g.w., war, electability, ford, reagan, nixon, Kennedy, johnson, polls, opinions, ranking
posted by carlalafong on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Report a Violation
Viewed 389 times
25 comments from 9 users

1

posted by randomfactor on Jan 16, 2007 at 01:55 PM
I agree with your last, but I think your formula falls down a bit because it doesn't measure performance, but only potential.  I doubt JFK will be ranked very highly by history in terms of what he accomplished, because he didn't even finish out the first term.  LBJ could well have been a great president but will forever be linked to Vietnam.  Ditto Nixon and Watergate.  I think Jimmy Carter is the best ex-president we've had in the past 100 years, and Camp David was historic diplomacy.  Bush Sr.'s image is overly buffed because he was smart enough to pardon the guy who could've fingered him, and as you said, he looks like a bleedin' genius for not going into Iraq now.
posted by randomfactor on Jan 16, 2007 at 01:56 PM
By the way, did you cut-and-paste this from somewhere else?  I'd love the link...
posted by TomW on Jan 16, 2007 at 02:07 PM
Couldn't find it online anywhere, but it looks like a copy/paste just from the intro.
posted by mattloch on Jan 16, 2007 at 02:23 PM
I'm not sure what influenced some of those ratings, but how can JFK get a "4" in International Politics when he was repsonsible for increasing our entanglement with Vietnam, and was caught both in the Bay of Pigs fiasco and for prodding the Soviets into a showdown during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Same with Nixon getting a "4"; sure, he opened up relations with China, but he had that war criminal Kissinger on staff, and had his disasterous "Secret Plan" for Vietnam (namely keeping us in for four years until he needed to get re-elected). I also thought that Nixon's and Carter's beginnings were fairly humble (both growing up on farms), as were Ford's. (Of course, "electability" is somewhat of a joke for including Ford, isn't it?) I'd also give JFK a somewhat lower Domestic Politics rating ("3") because of his treatment of the Civil Rights movement.
posted by randomfactor on Jan 16, 2007 at 02:31 PM
Remember, though, with the Cuban Missile Crisis we had intel showing that the Soviets were bluffing.  He signed off on Bay of Pigs but it really wasn't his initiative.  At the time of his death, we had fewer than 17,000 troops in Vietnam--less than in Bush's "surgery strategery."
posted by adampayne on Jan 16, 2007 at 04:23 PM
I'm surprised Ronald Reagan scored near the bottom. I know there was trickle-down economics coupled with the S&L scandals and fairly high interest rates to go along with Contra-gate but the Wall came down and America truly rebounded from a depressing time in the 1970s under his watch. I am no fan of the deregulation that happened during his Administration nor the Meese Police of that period, but I'm still surprised given the tremendous adulation he is accorded today that these scores were so low for him.
posted by johnburnssucks on Jan 16, 2007 at 04:43 PM

<<SMEAR TACTICS/EXPERT-AT-DOUBLESPEAK SUPPORT STAFF WITH TV & PRINT MEDIA CONNECTIONS>>

Clinton was the best at this; every woman who ever accused him of anything was either a "nut" or a "slut." The term "spin machine" was invented for Clinton's bunch - James Carville, Rahm Emmanuel, et al - and 85% of the media admitted to voting for Clinton.

You didn't want to get on Clinton's bad side. Ask Kathleen Willey what happened to her cat, "Bullseye."

posted by mattloch on Jan 16, 2007 at 04:52 PM
Adam, Reagan's legacy has been championed by the neo-cons that use the unrelated and incidental (some would even say despite-of) successes to support their "trickle-down" (voodoo) economics and social program cuts. Add to that the blatantly unfair treatment of the middle- and lower-class, busting of unions, turning out mental patients onto the streets, and other policies, and you have both revisionism and cherry-picking examples being used for nefarious ends. The fall of the Soviet Union was tangential to any policies enacted during his presidency, and he should be remembered best for the arms reductions he agreed to with the Soviets in the waning days of his presidency.
posted by randomfactor on Jan 16, 2007 at 05:01 PM

So, JBS, the "spin machine" worked perfectly?  Not a single case was ever verified?  I find it comforting that the better-educated voted for Clinton.  I'd have been surprised if they hadn't.

.

Ask Clinton what happened to *HIS* cat. 

posted by adampayne on Jan 16, 2007 at 06:17 PM
Matt, as I mentioned I was no fan and there were plenty of scandals to go around on Ronnie's watch, but I still find it curious he scored so low. Clinton had a bunch of failures and a stonewalled last couple of years due to Lewinsky-gate and the despicable impeachment process that solved nothing. And I agree that Jimmy Carter has been a great humanitarian after leaving the White House, but having him score higher than Reagan for a presidency is simply not a very accurate reflection of accomplishments. Yes, Jimmy worked tirelessly for peace in the Middle East, and the accord between Egypt and Israel was historic, but America's stature at the time was at an all-time low as were most people's spirits. Interest rates were going through the roof and he seemed more consumed by detail than the big picture. Our current commander-in-chief is the exact opposite and has no command of any detail. Both failed to govern effectively.
posted by adampayne on Jan 16, 2007 at 06:24 PM
It's a funny thing going over all these Presidencies, and how flawed all these Administrations truly were.  Even Ike, who now is truly revered, had big problems in the Suez, Korea and McCarthy  to pull his numbers down. Same for Truman, who now seems  to be in a bit of a decline recently, had huge problems that were never quite resolved. Oh well, fun post Carla!
posted by irv on Jan 16, 2007 at 06:51 PM

Adam,very observant, grasshopper. At some time during any presidency, the markers get called in and the man in office has to pay up with all the political capital he has banked. Add to that the political infighting within the ranks of the party occupying the white house during the end days of their term and you have the recipe for that funny thing you mentioned.

posted by motopoet on Jan 16, 2007 at 07:09 PM
Bill Clinton DECISIVE! Were you smoking the stuff he didn't inhale? Also, speaking of Willy, something like 40% of the women who voted for him did so because they thought he was good looking. GO WILLY! Obviously such a poll can never be done objectively, but it was interesting just the same.
posted by NancyII on Jan 16, 2007 at 07:42 PM

Looks determining whether or not a woman will vote for a man?  Amazing isn't it?  Grandma Tiffany said she would never vote fot Kennedy because she couldn't stand to look at his Irish paddy.  There's politics for ya.

Of course she was English, in her 70's, and a staunch protestant.  That might have also had something to do with it.

posted by johnburnssucks on Jan 17, 2007 at 08:27 AM

<<Also, speaking of Willy, something like 40% of the women who voted for him did so because they thought he was good looking.>>

I've been guilty of a similar crime. When I first moved to The Valley, I voted for Nicole Parra because she's cute. I voted for Arnold, but not for that same reason.  

posted by randomfactor on Jan 17, 2007 at 08:29 AM

And about 100 percent of the people voting for Shrub did it because they thought he wasn't an idiot.  So voters are fallible.

.

I think Arnold's cute, but I didn't vote for him.

posted by johnburnssucks on Jan 17, 2007 at 08:37 AM

<<Ask Clinton what happened to *HIS* cat.>> 

Ed Anger, "journalist" for the Weekly World News, recommended that Socks the Cat be defanged and declawed. Anger claimed that Socks chewed three stars off of the Betsy Ross flag, and used Paul Revere's wooden leg for a scratching post.

Anger also opined that the reason women cry more than men is because "their brains are much smaller, and it hurts every time they think. If you had a shooting pain go through your head every time you tried to add two plus two, you'd cry, too."

posted by randomfactor on Jan 17, 2007 at 09:27 AM
If you don't *KNOW* what happened to his cat, that's OK.  Getting most of your news from WWN will do that to ya.
posted by mattloch on Jan 17, 2007 at 10:23 AM
How else is he supposed to keep up with the travels and tribulations of Bat Boy?
posted by BJD on Jan 17, 2007 at 01:37 PM
All right, I'll chime in.  It seems that I've taken on defending President Bush as a career, even though I don't think he has done a good job, and I'm getting a little tired of it.  But these rankings are so subjective, and obviously designed simply to smear him.  The interesting thing to me is that none of these guys seem to have impressed anyone here with their presidential qualitIes, with the possible exception of Clinton for some.  It reinforces my belief that the job is too big for anyone to actually be good at it.
posted by mattloch on Jan 17, 2007 at 01:55 PM
BJD, for the most part, we know that most things will be worse off when a person leaves office than they were when they entered; all we ask is that they don't screw things up too badly. Every president has mistakes that will haunt them for the rest of their lives. Some presidents just do a better job at avoiding trouble than others. Some know better than to go looking for trouble.....
posted by motopoet on Jan 17, 2007 at 04:12 PM
I don't know that the statute of limitations has run out on what Clinton did with his cat.  Parra is like the gal on the Seinfeld episode who looks awesome in one light, bad in another. She really can be a hottie, but I still didn't vote for her. I still don't think Dubya is an idiot. Making bad decisions doesn't make you an idiot, it makes you human. I challenge anyone here to name a president, in the last hundred years, who didn't make decisions that weren't detrimental to the country. I agree with BJD that it is too big a job for any one person to good at it, especially in todays unforgiving political climate.
posted by johnburnssucks on Jan 17, 2007 at 04:27 PM

<<If you don't *KNOW* what happened to his cat, that's OK. Getting most of your news from WWN will do that to ya.>>

Lessee, I know that Socks was First Cat until Clinton acquired Buddy the dog, and when he left office he dumped ol' Socks off on Betty Currie, who Clinton owed big time for hiding things under her bed. Buddy done got runned over, though, which was a shame.

That WWN stuff is, like, 15 years old. One poor woman in Australia fell for a guy and planned on marrying him, but he ran off with her younger sister. Two years later she fell for another guy, and she planned to marry him, but he ran off with her older sister! Poor girl.

Guy #2 had a pencil-thin moustache and slicked-back hair. All that was missing was a toothpick in his mouth.

posted by NancyII on Jan 17, 2007 at 09:02 PM

So how does a first dog get "runned" over?  With that big old fence around the white house you'd think bowser would be safe.

Are you pullin' my leg?

posted by johnburnssucks on Jan 17, 2007 at 09:47 PM
Buddy the dog was run over after Clinton left office, near their home in Chappaqua, NY in 2002 (I looked this up on wikipedia). Clinton got another dog.
1

Leave a Comment
Ground Rules for posting comments:
  • No profanity or personal attacks.
  • Please comment on the subject of the post itself.
If you do not follow these rules we will remove your comment. Please keep it civil.

To protect users from spam, please enter the text from the image on the left.
   

Our readers recommend: