Jimmy Carter

The same here.While in office, I thought his policies were pretty good. But he never worked out how to use the bully pulpit of the presidency.

And yet he was better imho than Raygun. For both the US and the world.Enjoy

what I mean: Enjoy

Not just you, but others too.If you're pulling information (graphics or otherwise) from somewhere, give a source/reference link.Discussion at General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List') welcome and indeed encouraged.AdminnemooseusAdded by edit - Just now, looking at message 1, the graphics link is broken. No source reference. Now message 1 has no content.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added by edit.

Percy writes:

quote:

---

There was also the gas shortage with incredible lines at the pumps

---

I think you're confusing Carter for Nixon. There was a gas shortage in 1979 due to the Iranian Revolution and the Iran/Iraq war which brought the oil production of both countries to a halt, but that was nothing compared to the shortage under Nixon. OPEC instituted an embargo on the US.And prices stayed high.They collapsed after the 79 oil shock.

quote:

---

plus inflation was up way above 10% and mortgage interest rates above 15%.

---

Yes, due to the economic collapse during the Nixon administration, or have you forgotten about that? Rates were going down and GDP was recovering at the end of the Carter administration...until Reagan came in and cut taxes on the top end.And yet, despite all that, the economy fared better in the 70s than in the 80s. Carter's economy was one of the most robust we had seen. From the end of WWII to Obama, there have been just as many Republican administrations as Democratic administrations...and the economy has always done better under the Democrats.Job creation, for example: Of the 12 presidents, the top six are the Democrats. Reagan's the best Republican, but he boosted his numbers by expanding the public sector. Now, in and of itself, that's not a problem, but let's remember that the Republicans think that public sector jobs are what's killing the country.[Bureau of Labor Statistics: Job Growth per Year: Carter 3.1%, Reagan 2.1%
Private-sector jobs/year: Carter 2.3 million, Reagan 1.8 million]Carter was one of the best presidents we've ever had. If the Reagan campaign hadn't literally committed treason and convinced Iran to not release the hostages until after the election, there was a good chance he would have won and we wouldn't have the disaster that we see now.

That's how much politics is conducted these days, find the worst things to say about one guy, the best things to say about another, and never mind accuracy and context. There are no meaningful conclusions to be drawn from stuff like this.I think people have been very fair to Carter in this thread. He was a man who as president met problems like the energy crisis, stagflation and the Iran hostage crisis with timidity and malaise. Agree with his policies or not, Reagan met problems energetically, forthrightly and head on. One was a leader, one wasn't but later became a great and distinguished humanitarian.--Percy

Uh, no, but I think you're misinterpreting my message. To clarify, I had said that "bad things just seemed to happen on his watch," and then I enumerated some of them, like long gas lines. It's just a fact, something that happened while Carter was president. Well, that must be a relief to Ford that it was all Nixon's fault.Again, I think you're mistaking my message. Stagflation was just another bad thing that happened during the Carter administration.I don't know why you launched into a Democrats versus Republican comparison. I didn't say anything for or against either one, and I don't think that's what this thread is about. Some people like yourself can view Carter as "one of the best presidents we've ever had," but I don't think most people see him that way. He was a man who became president and found the job too big for him. He only found his true calling later.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

That's certainly one of the problems with Facebook (where the image came from), where you often see cherry-picked factoids presented.But it also depends on what you think are critical elements - my views seem different from yours here. Or with thoughtful reserve and reluctance to play the big bully. And I guess that depends on what you think a "good leader" means. Raygun invaded Grenada and Bushy Sr invaded Panama - both "met problems energetically, forthrightly and head on" but were their "solutions" for the greater good? Authoritarian people often seem like good choices for leaders because they act without question, full of Dunning-Kruger Self Assurance that they are *right* ...Raygun started the income inequality slide by initiating economic polices "energetically, forthrightly and head on" in spite of the fact that it was hogwash economics and depended heavily on stealing money from the Social Security funds to hide how underfinanced his budget was.Raygun had the Iran-Contra arms deal in his Whitehouse basement, because he "met problems energetically, forthrightly and head on" regardless of whether his "solution" actually involved high treason or violated US or international law.How many people in Carter's administration were investigated for illegal activity? How many were convicted of felonies?Does being a leader that can get people to march into a quagmire a good thing? When is such a "Pied Piper" Leader who takes countries into war when other solutions are possible a "good" leader as opposed to one that uses quiet back room diplomacy?Enjoy

Why do you want to debate Reagan versus Carter? Between you and Rrhain I feel like I'm walking into the middle of a play. Is there some ongoing Internet debate out there where people rehash all the best and worst of their administrations?I said what I had to say. Carter was a poor leader compared to Reagan, but he later came into his own and became a great humanitarian. That thing you posted from Facebook is just another example of the same tired political and misleading trashing there's already too much of - it doesn't matter who it was about, that kind of approach is always dismaying, to say the least.I can see now that some of you out there believe Carter was a great president and an inspiring leader, but though I don't share that opinion it doesn't seem anything worth arguing about.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

Percy responds to me:

quote:

---

I don't think most people see him that way.

---

They may not "see him that way," but not because of anything he did. He had one of the most successful presidencies in the modern era.

quote:

---

He was a man who became president and found the job too big for him.

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?Again, the man had one of the most successful presidencies our country has seen and you can say with a straight face that "the job was too big for him"? It's because he was so successful in his presidency that his "true calling," as you put it, was so beneficial.You've fallen for the lies, Percy. The Nixon/Ford legacy was one of the worst periods the country had been through and Carter brought us back from the brink. And because of him, the 70s were a more successful time for the country than the 80s. And yet somehow, people think that Reagan was a good president and Carter was a lousy one.I don't deny that people *think* that Carter was lousy.Just as I don't deny that people *think* that evolution is a crock.But just because two million people think a dumb thing, it's still a dumb thing.

Clearly you and many others think very highly of Jimmy Carter's presidency, but I think the Wikipedia section on Carter's public image and legacy is a pretty fair assessment, and it's pretty much in line with my own opinion.--Percy

Carter was right that there was a malaise in American society, and that malaise has led us directly to where we are now. Which is not a good place.I understand your opinion of Carter--you've made it clear. Like others here, I think you've bought the narrative that turns a good, ethical leader into a wimp, as though we'd have been better off with a nastier man. We tried that; it didn't work.It is difficult for me to understand how someone can be cognizant of Reagan collaborating with Iran to lock up the election, and then term him a strong leader and Carter a weak one. Like Obama, Carter had the potential to be a great president; like Obama, he ran into opposition that favored party over republic.If you are waiting for leadership that can simply brush off the antics of the GOP, you'll wait a long time.

No, I didn't buy the narrative. Like you, I lived the Carter presidency. I bought a house during the Carter presidency and paid over 13% mortgage interest. I think you've "bought the narrative."I have a very high opinion of Carter and have said some very positive things about him. I just don't think he was a very good president. I have a lower overall opinion of Reagan, particularly his science knowledge and his economics, but I do think he was a better president, particularly his first term, though he did have some particularly strong moments in foreign policy during his second term.Leadership, which I judge an essential quality of a great president, is an inherent quality, not the sum of policy positions, economic statistics and foreign policy decisions. I'm reminded of Achilles quarrel with Agamemnon when he laments that Agamemnon is leader of the Greeks only because he possesses an aura of leadership that Achilles lacks. Leadership isn't something tangible, but it has important positive effects. Reagan had it, Carter didn't, and it made a big difference in their presidencies.--Percy

So there were big positives to Reagan's presidency that I missed? Pray tell.

Anyone with any objectivity knows that every presidency contains positives and negatives. For some reason you and Rrhain and RAZD seem to be just itching for an argument with anyone who dares say anything negative about Carter or positive about Reagan. I earlier referenced the Wikipedia section on Carter's public image and legacy, so now let me reference the Wikipedia section on Reagan's legacy. It, too, pretty much reflects my own opinion, even echoing some things I said earlier.Carter is not my guy, and Reagan is not my guy. I don't have a guy. Since the beginning of time political people have believed that their guy is a great statesman and the other guy a horrible beast. These people are always with us, never realizing that there are no real devils or angels out there and that seeing the world in black and white is part of the problem.--Percy