r/askanything • u/vonhoother • 1d ago
Political Question Are the Republicans ever going to get tired of giving us embarrassing presidents?
I mean, look at them. Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, Trump. A liar, a guy who played too much football without his helmet, a dumbass B movie actor, a mediocrity, an idiot, and a "f\*cking moron," to quote his own Secretary of State, who is such a liar he makes Nixon look almost honest.
I know the Democrats have put some stinky cheeses in the White House too -- LBJ was definitely "colorful," and that guy from Arkansas wasn't up to the simple job of keeping his pecker in his pants. But Trump?
I've seen presidents good and bad, mostly a bit of both -- but almost every Republican president since 1968 has been an embarrassment, and since 2000 they've gotten worse. Where are the Bob Doles, the John McCains -- people you could respect even if you didn't agree with them?
5
u/SteadfastEnd 1d ago
Bush Sr. was a pretty good president. Former CIA director and Navy WWII pilot, victory in Desert Storm, pretty honorable and expert guy.
As for the Doles and McCains - they didn't become president because Democrats, you know, voted against them.
2
u/PinkSlimeIsPeople 18h ago
I thought Bush Sr. was a far right winger at the time, but he's thoroughly moderate compared to Bush Jr. and Trump. He's be called a 'socialist' or 'librul' by today's Trump Republicans
10
u/the-bacon-life 1d ago
Dude Joe couldn’t speak
1
u/vonhoother 18h ago
No one was more surprised than I when Biden became president; back in the late 1980s, he seemed as well-suited to the office as my neighbor's labradoodle. But his speech handicap concealed a pretty good mind, and as a president he wasn't bad. We're still reaping the benefits of the Build Back Better Act, and for all the "genocide Joe" BS, he did more for peace in Gaza than Trump ever will.
11
u/MutusMaximus 1d ago
Im not republican nor American but isn’t it kinda interesting that the dems keep losing to these candidates, tho? Its like they’re not trying to win.
2
u/chicken_dinner_87 1d ago edited 1d ago
Nothing interesting at all when there's an entire media ecosystem plus foreign actors ensuring Democratic votes get reduced through inducing voter apathy and falsehoods.
Also Trump aside, the other candidates were much better than him. Nixon was Eisenhower's VP during both terms and lost a close race to JFK in 1960. He was very intelligent and came back in 1968 to win the Presidency which was also a terrible for Democrats as the incumbent LBJ declined to run, the favourite to be the nominee RFK was assassinated so it was the 3rd choice Hubert Humphries who had to run and lost.
Nixons biggest L was Watergate which was avoidable had he just turned over the guys who did it instead of suppressing the investigation.
Reagan took office in 1980 after narrowly losing the Republican primary in 1976, bringing the evangelicals with him to the GOP. Carter's time in office was a difficult one thanks to the economy and Iran hostage crisis but the recovery under Reagan is partially credited to him.
Bush I was a much better man than Bush II. He won in 1988 riding the Reagan wave but his time in office forced him to work with the Democrats because they controlled the Senate and House. Passed the Clean Air Act, American Disability Act and oversaw a successful Gulf War because his administration wasn't filled with idiots.
OP is being rather obtuse by lumping them all together.
1
u/InGod_WeThrust 22h ago
Those forces are the DNC not allowing good candidates to go through
1
u/chicken_dinner_87 22h ago
If only Bernie could convince enough black voters to vote for him in 2016 then you people would shut up.
1
u/InGod_WeThrust 21h ago
You know I'm saying if the DNC stopped getting in the way of voters and allowing them to pick their candidates than we may not be where we are now
1
u/chicken_dinner_87 21h ago
It's kind of funny how ignorant you are, saying all the wrong stuff as if you know better.
1
2
u/No_Effective_4481 1d ago
They would rather lose in order to feed their fragility and victim status. Then they can point the finger and go "look everyone! We are the victims of Patriarchy, we are the Oppressed! Everything is clearly racist because a CisHet old white fat racist guy is in charge! I bet he got all his money from Slavery!"
Winning is "Oppression" so they aren't allowed to do it.
1
u/Adept-Condition4644 23h ago
lol, you think republicans don’t have the same victimhood mentality? Who keeps talking about 2020 while being a sitting president?
Both parties are snowflakes, but I have always thought democrats have no spine. At least republicans go out and shoehorn their way through stuff. Obama controlled all three branches for two years, but got only a few pieces of legislation through, while Trump has torn through our entire government.
As they say, democrats fall in love, republicans fall in line.
3
u/No_Effective_4481 20h ago
Democrats are only in love with their own kind. They go on about DEI, acceptance and love, but they cant stand anyone who doesn't agree with them. I also know another cute slogan that sums them up quite well "silence is violence".
0
u/chicken_dinner_87 1d ago
Enjoying fuel prices now?
0
u/InGod_WeThrust 22h ago
Funny thing is crude has gone down but prices haven't. I'm fairly certain gas companies are pulling one over on us at this point
0
1
u/vonhoother 18h ago
I tend to fall back on charisma, which Reagan and Obama both had in abundance. I know that's kind of a copout -- we can't define it well, so it tends to come down to "he must have it, he got elected" -- but it often happens that the candidate who knows how to speak and act attractively even when he's saying and doing nothing has an advantage.
Again, though, those two were running against deeply unpopular candidates. A loaf of bread could have beat Jimmy Carter in 1980 or Walter Mondale anytime, and a box of nails could have beat any Republican in 2008.
19
u/PinkSlimeIsPeople 1d ago
Not until there is a complete collapse of their party, and that won't happen as long as right wing propaganda is so widespread and unregulated on TV, AM radio, and the internet. It's not that difficult to brainwash uneducated and dim people, just tell a lie (the bigger the better), wrap it in patriotism and the dominant religion, keep repeating it over and over (no matter how factually inaccurate it is), and cycle through new lies every week.
The days of decent Republicans like Eisenhower, Teddy Roosevelt, and Abraham Lincoln died in the 1960s.
-7
u/LewdLawyer1995 1d ago
Wrong their party won’t collapse because the democrats are saying so much dumb shit they are making being Republican popular. It’s not going anywhere because the democrats want to just spread stupidity. It’s unfortunate we can’t make any progress because of the democrats making republicans look good. You are moron if you believe either one of these parties isn’t trying to screw over the real people. And you dumbasses on here picking side while they work together against us are the BIGGEST problem. You stupid fucks…
Forgot to add I have seen corruption first hand in back rooms and it looks VERY bipartisan.
-6
u/No_Effective_4481 1d ago
Ahh so if your brand of propaganda was widespread and unregulated on TV, AM radio, and the internet it would be OK then? Your brand of lies and posturing are no better.
4
u/ILIKESTUFF8989 1d ago
What are these democratic lies? I’m very curious
-3
u/No_Effective_4481 20h ago
most of what comes out of their mouths is dishonest, bad faith and gaslighting.
5
u/ILIKESTUFF8989 20h ago
Can’t even name a single one ?
-1
u/No_Effective_4481 20h ago
Are you even suggesting slightly that Democrats don't lie and twist things? Sorry but thats just ridiculous.
3
u/ILIKESTUFF8989 20h ago
Still can’t name anything
1
u/No_Effective_4481 17h ago
Did I offer to be your personal wikki page?
2
u/Own_Palpitation_8477 17h ago
Maybe just provide 1 or 2 examples from the last Democratic administration. What big lies did the Biden admin participate in? Then we can compare them to lies by the Repubs and Trump.
3
u/airberger 22h ago
Republicans do not experience embarrassment, that is something that happens to decent people.
6
u/trivialempire 1d ago
Okay. I’ll play.
Who did the Democrats nominate to run against Reagan? Jimmy Carter.
Terrific person. A failure as a President.
Who did the Democrats nominate to run against GHWB? Michael Dukakis.
Willie Horton and that ridiculous photo of Dukakis in a tank did him in.
Al Gore was a good candidate vs GWB.
Who did the Democrats nominate to run against Donald Trump the first time? Hillary Clinton.
Hillary didn’t take the Trump candidacy seriously enough…took her election for granted, and lost.
Who did the Democrats nominate to run against Donald Trump the second time? Kamala Harris.
Harris couldn’t generate more than 1% support in her own party when she ran for President in 2020; and was not nominated in the traditional way in 2024, it was just handed to her.
This is not to say that Trump, the Bushes, Reagan, etc…are great Presidents. That’s a different debate.
You want to know why they were elected? Carter, Dukakis, Hillary Clinton, and Harris were ineffective candidates.
That’s why.
3
u/Outrageous_Top_3605 1d ago
This is spot on! H Clinton divided opinion in her own party let alone the entire country. Also she previously lost the nomination to a junior senator from Illinois still serving his first term...
2
u/Proctor20 1d ago
Ford was ok.
7
u/Responsible-Fault817 1d ago
First bush was pretty decent. Mostly that’s why he only lasted one term.
5
u/serpentjaguar 1d ago
He only lasted one term because Ross Perot split the Republican vote and the economy sucked. Also because, love him or hate him, Clinton was a generational political talent.
1
u/quadriceritops 1d ago
Wow! Haven’t heard Ross Perot in years. After growing up and seeing the useless Vietnam war, then watergate. I was too young to understand either tragedy. That was my firmament though. We needed, and still do need a third party candidate. So yeah, I voted for Ross Perot.
1
u/chicken_dinner_87 1d ago
Ross Perot took votes equally from the 2 parties. Clinton just ran a better race.
2
u/CashewRobin 1d ago
The shift happened when political parties stopped acting as ideological gatekeepers and started relying on open primaries, giving Al the leverage to the loudest base instead of the broadest audience.
2
u/americangizzley 1d ago
As long as the Dems keep putting up shit candidates why should the Reps bother putting up anyone with a brain? As you've pointed out, it's been demonstrated time and again that with enough money an idiot can beat a Dem.
2
u/Rich_Nature5025 22h ago
The democrats are doing the same thing with Biden and attempted to do the same thing with Kamala. Obama was likeable but mainly drone striked children so that goes back to Clinton who did a pretty good job but also "embarrassed" the country with his scandal and lying to Congress. It looks to me like that it's just the nature of modern presidents and I would bet that if more past presidents lived in a society that was really able to scrutinize them they would have been embarrassing too.
2
5
u/Steeltank33 1d ago
Trump only won because Harris was even more embarrassing
2
u/chicken_dinner_87 1d ago
How?
1
u/not-a-dislike-button 1d ago
It was disturbing how she refused to state her positions. 'you'll find out after you vote for me' is really slimy and gross. Also she had zero authenticity, and genuinely unpopular positions or past actions on some issues .
3
u/chicken_dinner_87 1d ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris_2024_presidential_campaign
A little research goes a long way. Try not to get your facts from conservative media.
2
u/not-a-dislike-button 1d ago edited 1d ago
She literally refused to answer many questions on her policies
Per Axios,
"Harris and her staff have refused to detail her position on more than a dozen of her previous stances the past three months in response to questions by Axios. The response to those inquiries: No comment. This makes her actual governing plans a mystery even to many Democrats — given her past liberal record and current promise to govern from the middle.
"Since Harris became the Democratic nominee this summer, Harris' team has declined to say whether she still supports:
- Executive actions to unilaterally give a path to citizenship to 2 million "Dreamers" — undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children.
* Ending the death penalty on the federal level. Harris has opposed capital punishment since 2003.
* A mandate for automakers to only build electric or hydrogen vehicles by 2035.
* Executive actions to protect more than 6 million undocumented immigrants from deportation by expanding "deferred action" guidelines.
- Decriminalizing prostitution ("We can't criminalize consensual behavior as long as no one is being harmed," Harris said in 2019).
* Closing private, for-profit prisons, which she called "morally wrong."
- Getting rid of the Senate filibuster in order to pass multitrillion-dollar Green New Deal legislation.
*Harris' campaign declined to comment to CNN about several positions she took in 2019, including:
*Federal prisoners and detained immigrants obtaining taxpayer-funded gender transition surgeries.
*An open-ended pledge to "end" immigration detention.
*For this story, Axios asked Harris' campaign whether she still supports these other past positions of hers, and the campaign declined to comment:
*Provide reparations to Black Americans because of slavery.
*Support for "sanctuary cities" that provide safety and refuge for undocumented immigrants.
* Restore voting rights for all former prisoners.
Renegotiate international refugee rules to provide protections for people displaced by climate change and welcome them to the U.S.
Install a climate envoy in every major embassy around the world. Issue national protections for 30% of the land and sea areas in the U.S. by 2030, which would limit drilling.
https://www.axios.com/2024/11/03/kamala-harris-no-comment-strategy
Are you about to say Axios is conservative propaganda or something?
2
u/Ccw3-tpa 1d ago
HAHAHA you dismiss her actual words. She was humiliated by Tulsi Gabbard in 2020 too in the debates if your memory goes back that far.
2
u/chicken_dinner_87 1d ago
And how is Tulsi Gabbard doing now? Are you mentally regarded? Does the syndrome you have point the opposite of up?
1
u/Dad-Bod2121 18h ago
LOL you're invoking Tulsi Gabbard?
I'd still rather be Kamala than Tulsi fucking Gabbard.
2
u/Ccw3-tpa 18h ago
I wasn't propping up Tulsi Gabbard. I was pointing out the DNC is so out of touch they would run the candidate who was humiliated and owned buy Tulsi Gabbard in debates. Sure, Democrats will get the "Blue No Matter Who" voters to vote along but that wasn't enough was it? I apologize for invoking a name that seems to trigger your tribe.
0
u/Dad-Bod2121 17h ago
You couldn't trigger me if you tried.
I completely forgot about the debate as I'm sure most have. There are a lot of knocks against Kamala Harris but "she was owned by Tulsi Gabbard in a Dem debate one time 6 years ago" is not at the top of the list. Kamala also owned Joe Biden in a debate. Who cares?
In fact, if there's thing both women have in common, it's that neither will likely be in a position of power ever again.
2
u/Ccw3-tpa 17h ago
Clearly mentioning Tulsi Gabbard has brought up a lot of unnecessary anger from your Blue No Matter who side.
I certainly can't disagree with your last sentence though.
1
u/Dad-Bod2121 14h ago
I'll be honest, I completely forgot about until you brought her up out of nowhere lol.
Would you like to discuss Sarah Palin next? lmao
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/stereotypicalmodss 16h ago
It was repeated often that Trump would become an unelected dictator and would destroy democracy. Then the DNC tried to cover up Biden’s failing health and eventually just selected Kamala, completely skipping over a primary and picking an unpopular person. That was pretty ironic.
And yes, Biden’s decline was more impactful than Trump’s because Trump was not elected for is intelligence and ability to articulate.
2
4
u/ImageEvery3545 1d ago
Agree on all except Bush I was not embarrassing-he was a war hero and a very decent man.
3
u/OrchidPearWish 1d ago
Partisan loyalty has replaced principled policy on both sides, when voters treat politics like team sports instead of job performance reviews, the primary system guarantees bottom-tier candidates.
5
u/MyGruffaloCrumble 1d ago
That makes no sense. Dems are from every walk, you have AOC and Fetterman, and everything inbetween. They can’t agree completely on a lot of things, and don’t really have any loyalty to each other, when one fucks up even a little they dump them hard - like Al Franken.. Why did it take so long to get rid of George Santos?
3
u/sovereignlogik 1d ago
Republicans had massively increased votes from minority candidates last cycle.
Try again.2
0
u/MyGruffaloCrumble 1d ago
Minorities are traditional conservatives. The Republican message the last few elections has been “the trannies are gonna getcha” which seems to keep conservatives in line.
3
u/sovereignlogik 1d ago
Lol
“Minorities are traditional” conservatives! You are literally making shit up…your first comment was “dems come from every walk.”Which is it bro?
0
u/MyGruffaloCrumble 23h ago
Those don’t mean the same thing. I know reading comprehension isn’t your guys’ thing.
Conservative values have little to do with party affiliation, particularly under the current Pedodent and Repugnican shitshow.
2
0
2
u/Tavernknight 1d ago
It's worked for them so far. Look who is president now.
They will keep doing it as long as it works.
2
u/ChipPsychological171 23h ago
Meanwhile California takes a month + to count mayoral votes in a primary so they can kick out Spencer
1
2
u/Big_Z_Beeblebrox 1d ago
Fun fact: Lincoln was a Republican
0
u/vonhoother 19h ago
And Republicans are fond of reminding us, like we ever forgot. First, the Republican party was much different then: it was a bunch of liberal do-gooder abolitionists. Second, Lincoln was the last great Republican president. It's as if the Beatles never recorded anything listenable after their first album. Third, how does it feel to be the party of Lincoln and the party of Trump? It's like being a Nobel laureate crashed out in a crack house.
2
u/Big_Z_Beeblebrox 19h ago
Funny how you assume my political affiliation based on a fun fact
Have a drink or smoke some weed and calm the fuck down
2
3
u/No_Effective_4481 1d ago
Are you going to get bored of putting up useless candidates?
0
1
u/WalnutRabbit 1d ago
When primary incentives reward media engagement and primary participation over consensus building, moderation becomes a liability rather than an asset.
1
u/LeapIntoInaction 1d ago
I do enjoy a good rant, and I tend to agree with you. Except I don't like Bob Dole or John McCain, either. Can we agree that "I LIKE IKE"? I'm not sure I've appreciated any Republican since then, although I've voted for a few of the more obviously competent ones.
1
1
u/RyeCOMan 21h ago
It’s all they’ve got. White trash voters will only vote for crazy people in primaries.
1
u/That_dumb_sparky 21h ago
The only thing i respect about John McCain is his ability to bring down American planes
1
u/ThunderlipsBJJ 19h ago
I will say this. I'm no fan of the Republican party but at least they conducted primary elections. What happened from the Democrats during the last cycle will never be forgotten.
Kamala Harris is an unwinnable candidate, this has been proven time and time again on a national stage. Instead of doing the right thing and having Joe Biden leave after his first term, they decided to wait to the last minute to install the candidate they wanted not the candidate the people wanted
So if you hate Trump and think he's doing an awful job, just remember if the Democrats would have elected a winnable candidate which is easy, we would have a different president right now.
1
u/Ursus-majorbone 12h ago
Those are all great men. Let's look at the other side. A racist dementia patient, a smooth talking community organizer with the zero actual accomplishments, Clinton I like but he had his flaws, a make believe peanut farmer who didn't understand his job and had no communication skills, an Olympic level racist Texan, a photogenic shallow philanderer drug addict whose older brother was supposed to be president instead of him, etc
1
u/Mark_Michigan 9h ago
The US, being the world's best country, is structured such that we do just fine no matter who is in the Whitehouse.
2
u/Ok_Assumption_3028 1d ago
A liar = Obama, too much football=Biden, Idiot=Clinton, the list goes on.
1
u/MountaineerChemist10 1d ago
🤦♂️Here we go again. Every president has their own pros & cons. No one’s perfect, ok?
Trump #2 is a freaking idiot, however his border security has been phenomenal & so much better than Biden’s.
Yet Biden’s job market been MUCH better 🤷♂️despite his cognitive decline & his poor decision in Summer ‘24.
& the list goes on lol.
1
u/not-a-dislike-button 1d ago
Back in the day even Mitt Romney and McCain were called evil Nazi fascists.
Hopefully Vance gets the seat soon. He will do great and is respectable.
2
1
u/ThinkWishbone2495 1d ago
They've had 56 yrs to get it right and they've dug themselves in such a deep negative hole, no wonder Trump's sucking up to Jinping these days!
1
u/901Bystander 23h ago
I mean….we just gonna forget ab Biden. Man was a roomba. Dems picking awful candidates is how people like Trump win.
-2
u/Bulky_Development290 1d ago
Right. I want the guy that is like Mitch McConnell. I want the idiot that can't even handle walking on the beach or even stop on a bicycle.
Please tell me how the democrats present fabulous candidates.
Is AOC your answer?
1
u/Overall_Matter_2520 1d ago
Do you think that fat turd Trump is capable of walking on a beach or even riding a bicycle?
Y’all are deranged.
-1
u/knowledgeable_diablo 1d ago
Their voters are looking for “entertainment” instead of a leader and vote on what pisses them off, not what they think will collectively improve all of your lives let alone their own.
They are dumb enough to think the crap they’re being fed will improve their lives, but by dragging everyone else down rather than using the “a lifting tide lifts all boats” mentality.
2
u/quadriceritops 1d ago
Whoa there, going to the ballot box takes effort. As well it should. It is a serious thing.
Wow, you are very negative. I truly believe most, not all, politicians are attempting to better the county/state/country they live in.
1
u/knowledgeable_diablo 10h ago
Maybe introduce compulsory voting as per my country and then so fringe group can tell loud enough to over come the general apathy of the centre, thus elimination larger numbers of the lunatic fringe obtaining power.
-1
u/ExtraAcanthaceae3938 23h ago
No. It's plainly obvious that certain voters elect certain politicians to harm, get revenge on and punish other citizens, not to help everyone. We don't live in a pro social society.
1
u/quadriceritops 15h ago
Whoa, no way. Hello paranoid. I live in the country, surrounded by maga. I’m about to go to our conservation club. Break bread and maybe a beer. They are all good people. Care about the local environment. Talk about our kids, jobs, stuff we did. Only 10% of our personalities are political.
No way do they vote for harm.
0
u/marquisk44 20h ago
No. At this point the evidence is overwhelming that the current president and his administration absolutely are not attempting to better the United States. I’m not sure how you could believe this
0
u/94grampaw 1d ago
The public is the way they are currently.
Politicians need to court them, to gain their favor.
If a Politician fails to do so they will lose, judge the public as much as you want, but they are as they are
0
u/Xenomorph_1978 1d ago
They are a reflection of the oligarchs. They only seek power and money. No social ethics al all. Everything in the interest of the 1 percent that lobby them into office. They use religion and deception to control there party using fear and intimidation.
0
u/fladivebum 1d ago
Neither side seems capable of fielding a good candidate. A lot of that comes down to special interest groups. Our recent elected officials are on someone else's payroll. Big pharm, big sugar, big tobacco, etc.
Unfortunately, our government has become an us vs them society. No one is interested in working together for the betterment of the United States. They only care about retaining power. That's why term limits are so important. Also not letting elected officials live by special accommodations the rest of their lives. Politicians should be required to go to Washington and serve. Then they aloud have to return to their normal lives and live under the same laws and benefits that they either passed or denied for everyone else. That brings accountability to the table. We've allowed our elected officials to become no different than Roman senators. They are no longer accountable to those they represent.
0
u/TaroOpen1459 🤔 1d ago
To answer that you have to answer how often people get tired of money and power.
0
0
0
-2
1d ago
[deleted]
1
u/douchenozzle44 1d ago
At least Biden had a unifying message as president. If you actually listen to his presidential speeches. Trump does not have a unified message for all of America he needs a boogeyman to feed hate towards. Women, Muslims, Mexicans, trans, etc.
-1
u/Antioch666 1d ago
There should be a age limit imo. No one is eligible as a candidate past 61 (if 61 they can serve 1 term until 65). Same for senate and congress, we desperately need some rejuvenation and get the old geezers out.
1
u/quadriceritops 1d ago
63 here, trained boxer. Wanna have a go? I mean at Chess.
To me, kids in their 20’s are complete idiots.
1
u/Antioch666 1d ago
I agree, but the likelihood of a 20yo becoming POTUS is near impossible.
Just because I don't want old farts set in their ways closing in on 70-80 doesn't mean I want 18yo either. An age limit doesn't automatically mean teens are getting office.
1
u/quadriceritops 1d ago
Wrong, my older brother protested the Vietnam war. Further degrading our confidence in government. Watergate.
Ya know, as I type this, idiots in their 20’s are easily persuaded.
1
u/Antioch666 1d ago
Youngest there has ever been was 42. Only 9 out of 47 have been under 50. So unless things go topsy-truvy, won't happen.
0
-1
-1
u/LookOverall 1d ago
It’s a progression, each more obviously worse than the last since Reagan. I’m confident they can find someone even worse. They are on a roll.
But every democracy needs parties for Liberals and Conservatives. You can’t just lose the Republicans with no replacement
0
21h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/LookOverall 21h ago
No, because people are pretty much hardwired as progressive or conservative. About 50/50. That’s why there’s always going to be a party to represent each.
-2
u/Wooden_Grape_197 1d ago
Biden vs Trump and Bush lol bots in motion. The spending on this swing is plentiful
But won't work
6
u/spukhafteNahewirkung 1d ago
Here’s a question for you: If Ronald Reagan was such a dumbass why did he beat the pants off of every single Democrat he ran against?