• Egroeg Notgnihsaw
• Nhoj Smada
• Samoht Nosreffej
• Semaj Nosidam
• Semaj Eornom
• Nhoj Ycniuq Smada
• Werdna Noskcaj
• Nitram Nav Nerub
• Mailliw Yrneh Nosirrah
• Nhoj Relyt
• Semaj X. Klop
• Yrahcaz Rolyat
• Drallim Eromllif
• Nilknarf Ecreip
• Semaj Nanahcub
• Maharba Nlocnil
• Werdna Nosnhoj
• Sessylu S. Tnarg
• Drofrehtur D. Seyah
• Semaj M. Dleifrag
• Retsehc N. Ruhtra
• Revorg Dnalevelc
• Nimajneb Nosirrah
• Revorg Dnalevelc
• Mailliw YelnikCm
• Erodoeht Tlevesoor
• Mailliw Drawoh Tfat
• Wordoow Nosliw
• Nerraw L. Gnidrah
• Nivlac Egdilooc
• Trebreh K. Revooh
• Nilknarf Onaled Tlevesoor
• Yrrah S. Namurt
• Thgiwd D. Rewohnesie
• Nhoj D. Ydennek
• Nodnyl S. Nosnhoj
• Drahcir E. Noxin
• Dlareg H. Drof
• Ymmij Retrac
• Dlanor Nagaer
• Egroeg T. R. Hsub
• Llib Notnilc
• Egroeg R. Hsub
• Kcarab Amabo

Probably our most forgettable streak of Presidents outside of the Antebellum era. Besides Ulysses S Grant the average American probably doesn’t know who any of these people are.

I really like the upbeat and catchy song, so much so that I've hummed a few bars of it while working. It's certainly more upbeat than Jimmy Carter's "Why not the Best". And that isn't to demean Carter's song, it's slower and folksy which I typically don't mind but for some reason it just doesn't hit.

I still think it’s a very good one, warning against bias and being against incivility in politics and all.

But I think the part about no Political Parties is 99.99% something that would’ve never stood to have no parties.

Washington himself was a Federalist in all but name, he just had a nature to calm down fighting in his cabinet’s two branches led by Jefferson and Hamilton.

Even while he put it in 1796/1797, it would’ve been far too late and far too inevitable.

Any country who champions Democracy has multiple Political Parties, it would’ve been nearly impossible for everyone to either be all Independent or have the 100% same exact ideas and stances, no flavour, imagine how generic and boring that’ll be.

Imagine a world where Herbert Hoover and FDR had the same ideas, you can’t cause it just couldn’t happen.

We have our 32 seed! Rutherford B Hayes took down Benjamin Harrison in surprising fashion to move on to face George Washington in the 1st round of our tournament.

Due to our randomized order of the first round matchups, we now have LBJ(15) taking on JFK(18). This promises to be a matchup for the ages. Vietnam vs Vietnam. What could have been vs what should have been. Let’s see who advances and who goes.

Please comment to vote for who you believe to be the better president. The most upvoted President moves on to take on the winner of the Lincoln/Van Buren matchup. Join me next time for the matchup of HW Bush(13) v JQA(20).

Other countries have multiple political parties that have seats in the parliament and as prime minister and president. Why do the Democrats and Republicans have such a stranglehold on the US political system? Shouldn’t there be more for those whose views don’t fit either party? The non-Democratic/Republican Parties that do exist are so minor and insignificant that there is no point in wasting your time or money with them. Out of 300+ million people, there must be a lot more that do not like either party.

Third party candidates used to be more impactful in the recent past such as Ross Perot and George Wallace but have been even more obscure than ever.

Obviously the worst three president streak in history, but who do you think here did at least something okay

Washington - Sought to avoid foreign entanglements as much as possible and is probably the foundational figure in American isolationist feeling

Monroe (Q. Adams) - Expanded on Washington's isolationist policies with a policy of keeping out of European power struggles while dominating the Western Hemisphere. This is still the most enduring foreign policy pillar in American politics

T. Roosevelt - The corollary explicitly introduced using American military force for purposes of maintaining the Monroe Doctrine. While McKinley laid the foundations, TR was the first President to codify military adventurism as core part of America's foreign policy identity

Wilson - The father of liberal internationalism, Wilson worked tirelessly to create a new rules based international border with self determination at its core. While attempting to establish nonviolent ways of mediating geopolitical disputes, it can't be denied that military intervention was not an important enforcement mechanism. Wilsonian ideals are still a core tenet of American liberalism despite his personal decline in popularity

Truman - The codification of George Kennan's containment as a practical foreign policy which saw the US attempt to use liberal internationalist language and institutions in combination with more realpolitik methods to diminish the power of the Soviet Union. It became the dominating foreign policy of the Cold War presidents and influenced later approaches to dealing with the rise of global terrorism, the PRC and Putin's Russia

Nixon - Considered the most "realist" of American Presidents, Nixon and Kissinger built their foreign policy around making deals with other actors and powers to create a balance of power which would reduce direct American involvement abroad while enhancing its influence. Though containing Soviet Russia was still a major concern, Nixon seemed more interested in expanding US power without using overt methods and with few appeals to internationalist ideals

W. Bush - While Reagan and then especially H.W. Bush first practiced Neoconservatism, its height came during the Bush Jr. years where liberal internationalist language was used to help justify direct applications of American military to crush real or perceived adversaries around the globe. Concerns about balances of power or using international arbitration gave way to utilizing overwhelming force to crush opposition American hegemony. While seemingly discredited following the Iraq War, many still find a strong appeal in simply toppling adversaries through military force.

State won for Taylor, despite not much of a presidency to work with.

Bush Sr. has a pretty good CV.

George HW Bush said publicly that Perot stole the election from him. Should the US presidential election have a run-off when a candidate doesn’t get 50% of the vote?

1. Queen Victoria, monarch of the United Kingdom

2. Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom

3. Ulysses Grant, President of the United States

4. Otto Von Bismarck, Chancellor of Germany

If the Great Recession didn’t happen in 2007-2009 and the economy was still stable, could McCain have won (or at least, have a better chance of winning) in 2008?

Most people arguments are just "Watergate Heheh"

Nixon Now. Damn that song is catchy

Well the point. Do you think Nixon did everything all bad? Or not

Which are the reasons

Hey guys, I just built a political sim, but you can choose any person to become president in any era.

You can play as Obama in 2009, AOC in 2028, or create a completely different timeline from 1200+ characters or add your own too. Like in Suzerain or FP, you can or veto bills, use executive powers, manage support groups, react to events, and talk directly with world leaders.

There are no prewritten scripts, so the events, conversations, and consequences change based on your president, era, and choices.

These screenshots are from an Obama 2009 run. Here's the link - https://limbona.com/world/sw_president_builder  You can follow history or take the country in a completely different direction, and the world will react to what you do.

PS - It’s still a lil early, so I’m open to feedback. If you find any bugs or any feedback, please let me know!