And Harding had prostitute orgies in the White House.
Jake Peralta: World's Grossest Pervert
|
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
i.imgur.com/OBxVnqJ.png ~ www.azaleasdolls.com/dressupgames/heroine-creator.php
i.imgur.com/Pj3WBiE.jpg ~ www.dolldivine.com/sailor-moon-senshi-maker.php
|
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 15 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
|
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 10 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
Jackson is who I hear people say. Johnson is the one that sounded like the truest of all asses though.
i.imgur.com/OBxVnqJ.png ~ www.azaleasdolls.com/dressupgames/heroine-creator.php
i.imgur.com/Pj3WBiE.jpg ~ www.dolldivine.com/sailor-moon-senshi-maker.php
|
Did you hear that from your parents or your edgelord classmates?
My name is Harpuia, one of the four Guardians of Master X and General of the Strong Air Battalion, The Rekku Army.
|
Sayoria posted...
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 10 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
Jackson is who I hear people say. Johnson is the one that sounded like the truest of all asses though.
Yeah, Johnson was bad. The contenders for worst president are probably Harding, Johnson, and Buchanan.
|
(Topic Creator)1 day ago#7
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Johnson was sabatoged. He was weak but he didn't do active harm. Harding and Trump purposefully harm(ed) the country to benefit cronies.
Jake Peralta: World's Grossest Pervert
|
Jackson is with people like Roosevelt where they helped the economy and s*** but also committed moral atrocities
|
|
|
KiwiTerraRizing posted...
SageHarpuia posted...
Did you hear that from your parents or your edgelord classmates?
I picked up a bit while getting a Master's in History you dumb bastard.
lmao
|
KiwiTerraRizing posted...
SageHarpuia posted...
Did you hear that from your parents or your edgelord classmates?
I picked up a bit while getting a Master's in History you dumb bastard.
Uh huh. Every CEman has a Master's in History, Philosophy, Psychology, and Engineering, and this is in addition to having a 140+ IQ.
|
|
|
admiral testing the waters knowing hes about to get schooled in history if he makes his usual dumb comments
|
AlternativeFAQS posted...
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 10 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
you are so goddamn stupid it's incredible
Quality Mr. Dimbulb post
|
dude I don't care what ignorant, racist morons think of me
|
This President is so bad he almost defies categorization as a President. He's not committed to doing the job at all. I would put him in with William Henry Harrison and James Garfield.
As for the Jackson stuff, I'd put him as average, not great. Mostly because what he did to the natives was legitimately horrific, but also because his actual accomplishments were not that great. Paying off the debt didn't really do anything and might have been a hindrance. He brought a sort of mob rule to Washington, which again is mix bag. But he certainly wasn't a caretaker, so I'll give him credit for that.
|
AlternativeFAQS posted...
dude I don't care what ignorant, racist morons think of me
You seem incredibly triggered for a guy who doesn't care. I think you retain the crown for most emotionally immature regular on CE, which is impressive.
|
|
|
AlternativeFAQS posted...
I can't hear you with those orange balls in your mouth. please speak up
The Admiral posted...
most emotionally immature regular on CE
|
The Admiral posted...
AlternativeFAQS posted...
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 10 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
you are so goddamn stupid it's incredible
Quality Mr. Dimbulb post
Aren't most of the presidents between Jackson and Lincoln considered to be pretty bad?
I want a pet Lavos Spawn.
[Order of the Cetaceans: Phocoena dioptrica]
|
people don't need to be emotional to make fun of ignorant, racist morons.
|
uwnim posted...
The Admiral posted...
AlternativeFAQS posted...
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 10 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
you are so goddamn stupid it's incredible
Quality Mr. Dimbulb post
Aren't most of the presidents between Jackson and Lincoln considered to be pretty bad?
Polk was average, all the others were terrible.
|
uwnim posted...
The Admiral posted...
AlternativeFAQS posted...
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 10 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
you are so goddamn stupid it's incredible
Quality Mr. Dimbulb post
Aren't most of the presidents between Jackson and Lincoln considered to be pretty bad?
you should probably be asking TC and not the s*** poster.
|
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 15 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
lol no. I will agree with you that he's not the worst and arguably not in the lower half or presidents, but no credible historian is going to rank him in the top 10. I also understand what your saying about not pushing modern day morals on historical figures, but lets not pretend like this man didn't encourage state sponsored genocide.
|
The Admiral posted...
You seem incredibly triggered for a guy who doesn't care. I think you retain the crown for most emotionally immature regular on CE, which is impressive.
There is nothing wrong with being triggered over racism. There is everything wrong with people who aren't triggered by it, and stay silent.
|
What exactly should Jackson have done about the indian situation?
I want a pet Lavos Spawn.
[Order of the Cetaceans: Phocoena dioptrica]
|
(Lead Moderator)1 day ago#27
justaguy3492 posted...
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 15 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
lol no. I will agree with you that he's not the worst and arguably not in the lower half or presidents, but no credible historian is going to rank him in the top 10. I also understand what your saying about not pushing modern day morals on historical figures, but lets not pretend like this man didn't encourage state sponsored genocide.
Generally someone is not said to be in the "top 15" if they're in the top 10...
|
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 15 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
"Sure, he killed Indians. But he was a great leader."
|
KiwiTerraRizing posted...
SageHarpuia posted...
Did you hear that from your parents or your edgelord classmates?
I picked up a bit while getting a Master's in History you dumb bastard.
Lmao. What a waste of time, money, and effort.
Posted with GameRaven 3.2.2
|
I'd say that Harding shouldn't even count. He gets an honorable mention. I wouldn't feel comfortable saying Trump is the worst, yet. So far yeah he's loud, offensive, and boisterous, but he's pretty much a lame duck. Sure he has his EOs, but the next dem president is just gonna wipe it away. Let me know when he gets some actual legislation done that is as hard as the ACA to get rid of. I would put Johnson, Buchanan, and Wilson as the top three for worst president, though. justaguy3492 posted...
I also understand what your saying about not pushing modern day morals on historical figures, but lets not pretend like this man didn't encourage state sponsored genocide.
While presentism has its pros and cons, I'd largely agree with the idea that we shouldn't put our own morality on those in the past. However, he had his critics at the time so it's not as simple as "it was 200 years ago ignore it." It's like saying that "of course people had slaves you can't judge them" when there was literally Tubman and other emancipation leaders fighting to get slaves free at the same time as other people were happily owning slaves. Maybe if we're talking about soldiers from 2000 years ago raping the losers side I'd get it
|
KarmaMuffin posted...
I wouldn't feel comfortable saying Trump is the worst, yet. So far yeah he's loud, offensive, and boisterous,
but he's pretty much a lame duck. Sure he has his EOs, but the next dem president is just gonna wipe it away.
The graver threat are the invisible guardrails to our democracy that are being smashed; the uncodified political norms that are being torn up. (bipartisan consensus and anti-majoritarianism safeguards like the filibuster for SCOTUS nominees, partisan self-restraint and fair play, not using temporary control of government institutions for partisan advantage, respect for the free press, etc.) Whether or not Donald Trump enshrines himself as dictator of the United States of America (I don't think he can, or will)-- Do you think it's more or less likely, in the aftermath of his presidency, that the country will fall under the spell of a competent populist demagogue who's able to appeal to the worst impulses of Americans to rise to power and take total control over everything? I think the answer is more likely.
|
The Admiral posted...
KiwiTerraRizing posted...
SageHarpuia posted...
Did you hear that from your parents or your edgelord classmates?
I picked up a bit while getting a Master's in History you dumb bastard.
Uh huh. Every CEman has a Master's in History, Philosophy, Psychology, and Engineering, and this is in addition to having a 140+ IQ.
This is a funny post because he's mocking people like himself.
|
RaptorLC posted...
justaguy3492 posted...
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 15 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
lol no. I will agree with you that he's not the worst and arguably not in the lower half or presidents, but no credible historian is going to rank him in the top 10. I also understand what your saying about not pushing modern day morals on historical figures, but lets not pretend like this man didn't encourage state sponsored genocide.
Generally someone is not said to be in the "top 15" if they're in the top 10...
Admiral originally said top 10 instead of 15. He likely didn't notice the edit when he quoted him.
|
Skye Reynolds posted...
The Admiral posted...
Sayoria posted...
I thought it was unanimous that Jackson and Johnson were the worst.
Andrew Jackson? Consensus among actual historians is that he's easily a top 15 president. It's only in SJW pseudo-history where he's looked down upon.
"Sure, he killed Indians. But he was a great leader."
You guys always seem to leave out the part where these Indians were killing American settlers. It's not like Jackson said "hey, for s***s and giggles, let's massacre these people." There were ongoing skirmishes along multiple frontier borders, not to mention efforts where the British and Spanish teamed up with the Indians to fight Americans.
|
The Admiral posted...
KiwiTerraRizing posted...
SageHarpuia posted...
Did you hear that from your parents or your edgelord classmates?
I picked up a bit while getting a Master's in History you dumb bastard.
Uh huh. Every CEman has a Master's in History, Philosophy, Psychology, and Engineering, and this is in addition to having a 140+ IQ.
sexist
Be a team player, guard those super jump rings. See a team member inking a wall to swim up on? ink with them. Ink your foes into ash. http://tinyurl.com/z7hbzrr
|
The Admiral posted...
You guys always seem to leave out the part where these Indians were killing American settlers. It's not like Jackson said "hey, for s***s and giggles, let's massacre these people."
Can you provide a source on how many white settlers were murdered by the Five Civilized Tribes prior to the Trail of Tears to back that up?
|
Glass_Phantom posted...
The Admiral posted...
You guys always seem to leave out the part where these Indians were killing American settlers. It's not like Jackson said "hey, for s***s and giggles, let's massacre these people."
Can you provide a source on how many white settlers were murdered by the Five Civilized Tribes prior to the Trail of Tears to back that up?
Even if there were a source for that, it's not like anyone wouldn't potentially kill someone who was determined to settle down in their home without permission.
|
wah_wah_wah posted...
Glass_Phantom posted...
The Admiral posted...
You guys always seem to leave out the part where these Indians were killing American settlers. It's not like Jackson said "hey, for s***s and giggles, let's massacre these people."
Can you provide a source on how many white settlers were murdered by the Five Civilized Tribes prior to the Trail of Tears to back that up?
Even if there were a source for that, it's not like anyone wouldn't potentially kill someone who was determined to settle down in their home without permission.
They had permission via a treaty signed by the Cherokee people. The Trail of Tears took place because the Indians did not want to leave land that had been legally granted to the U.S.
|
The Admiral posted...
They had permission via a treaty signed by the Cherokee people. The Trail of Tears took place because the Indians did not want to leave land that had been legally granted to the U.S.
You really aren't a very good human being, are you?
|
Glass_Phantom posted...
The Admiral posted...
They had permission via a treaty signed by the Cherokee people. The Trail of Tears took place because the Indians did not want to leave land that had been legally granted to the U.S.
You really aren't a very good human being, are you?
So you've stopped trying to discuss the issue because you're wrong and are just engaging in ad hominems. You're done here.
|
So it really depends on your criteria. Unless something about Trump changes I think his favorability is going to dip even more over time.
In the moment I think most people will write him off as a president that accomplished nothing and therefore isn't of note. But in the long run he has sown more division among the branches of government, the media, and just the populace in general. Those scars will not magically heal and will fester for quite some time. There is also the matter of a somewhat illegitimate Supreme Court nomination, not solely on him mind you, but however that pick turns out will be attributed to him.
And of course if anything comes of global warming that we are not prepared for you can lay a lot of it back it his feet where he turned petulant while the rest of the world agreed to do something.
|
realnifty1 posted...
And of course if anything comes of global warming that we are not prepared for you can lay a lot of it back it his feet where he turned petulant while the rest of the world agreed to do something.
Harvey is an indicator of how climate change is gonna f*** us, of course the GOP is just going to ignore it even though a bunch of red states are at risk from them
|
The Admiral posted...
So you've stopped trying to discuss the issue because you're wrong and are just engaging in ad homimens. You're done here.
You didn't answer my question to begin with, friend. You're the one who abdicated the argument when I asked you to back up your claim. What is it that makes you do this? Do you get enjoyment out of it?
|
The Admiral posted...
wah_wah_wah posted...
Glass_Phantom posted...
The Admiral posted...
You guys always seem to leave out the part where these Indians were killing American settlers. It's not like Jackson said "hey, for s***s and giggles, let's massacre these people."
Can you provide a source on how many white settlers were murdered by the Five Civilized Tribes prior to the Trail of Tears to back that up?
Even if there were a source for that, it's not like anyone wouldn't potentially kill someone who was determined to settle down in their home without permission.
They had permission via a treaty signed by the Cherokee people. The Trail of Tears took place because the Indians did not want to leave land that had been legally granted to the U.S.
There is evidence that the treaty was not signed by relevant tribal authorities and might have been signed under the threat of force (automatically nullifying it). It would be like if China signed a treaty with AlternativeFAQs for all of our land, without consulting the Senate or President.
|
KarmaMuffin posted...
realnifty1 posted...
And of course if anything comes of global warming that we are not prepared for you can lay a lot of it back it his feet where he turned petulant while the rest of the world agreed to do something.
Harvey is an indicator of how climate change is gonna f*** us, of course the GOP is just going to ignore it even though a bunch of red states are at risk from them
Harvey was not an atypical hurricane by any measure. It's damage was the result of where it hit, not because of some extreme severity. You guys trying to link individual weather events to climate change are pushing pseudo-science and need to stop it.
|
Buchanan
The poster formerly known as Kakarot181: July 2, 2002 - March 14, 2012.
Irregardless, for all intensive purposes, I could care less.
|
wah_wah_wah posted...
There is evidence that the treaty was not signed by relevant tribal authorities and might have been signed under the threat of force (automatically nullifying it). It would be like if China signed a treaty with AlternativeFAQs for all of our land, without consulting the Senate or President.
The Second Seminole War was a direct result of the federal government signing a treaty with tribal leaders under duress and attempting to carry it out.
|
The Admiral posted...
Glass_Phantom posted...
The Admiral posted...
They had permission via a treaty signed by the Cherokee people. The Trail of Tears took place because the Indians did not want to leave land that had been legally granted to the U.S.
You really aren't a very good human being, are you?
So you've stopped trying to discuss the issue because you're wrong and are just engaging in ad homimens. You're done here.
You really need to stop criticizing others for stuff you do daily, Admiral.
|
gotta go with buchanan-- didn't really do much as the country fell apart. seems like a failure of the core part of the job
"You will not be happy if you continue to search for what happiness consists of. You will never live if you are looking for the meaning of life"-Camus
|
The Admiral posted...
Harvey was not an atypical hurricane by any measure. It's damage was the result of where it hit, not because of some extreme severity. You guys trying to link individual weather events to climate change are pushing pseudo-science and need to stop it.
More greenhouse gases means a hotter earth, Which means more water vapor in the atmosphere, Which means bigger storms.
|
Sweet dreams are made of cheese
No comments:
Post a Comment