Who was the most evil President?

[Never Made it to Graceland]

Ronald Reagan is the worst and most evil president of all time.

[GMantis]

Harry Truman, for deliberately using two nuclear weapons against cities.

[Senator Incitatus]

Perhaps this question is impossible to answer; it is simply the case that putting a man under such scrutiny reveals that people are mostly gray. Or, perhaps instead, Woodrow Wilson.

[Mr. Smith]

Trump or Reagan.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

DIxiecrats, they spurned the KKK movement Trump wasn't the worse Prez because he came after Apartheid , but has the same KKK movement, right militia groups and insurrection

[dead0man]

Lyndon Johnson

Why was Johnson "evil"?

LBJ was admittedly a repellent character on a personal level--constant infidelity (including a cavalier attitude towards sexual consent), unkindness to animals, almost-indisputable engagement in election fraud in his Senate primary against the ideologically far worse Coke Stevenson, at least some degree of personal racism despite his antiracist policies as President.

I find your critique here very biased.  Fraud in elections was commonplace in Texas (and other places) at that time.  Given what he did for civil rights, to criticize him for "at least some degree of personal racism" seems incredibly ungenerous--particularly given that whatever racism he had was most likely either less or, at the very least, no worse than most whites of his region and generation.  It's true that Johnson was a hunter, and I've always considered that his worst trait.  As far as infidelity--it's up to each person who's married/engaged/in a relationship to decide whether to be faithful or not.  As long as whoever they have sex with is a consenting adult, I don't take issue with it.  I would like to know what you mean by "a cavalier attitude toward sexual consent," though.


While Johnson could be a very difficult man--very demanding to his staff (as well as his wife), prone to  what George Reedy called "fantastic rages," and at times very crude (he urinated on one of his Secret Service agents at one point), he also had very positive qualities as well.  As Reedy also said, he could be a "big, magnificent, inspiring leader."  He had a colorful sense of humor and genuinely cared about others, both those who were around him and, on a larger scale, those who were disadvantaged--particularly African Americans and other minorities, and those living in poverty.  He was extremely intelligent as well.  

tl:dr version
he was asshole, and also, he wasn't

My favorite parts:
1.sure he was a racist and a fraud, but that just made him typical
2.lying in front of your closest friends and family and swearing to your god that you will be faithful isn't a huge character flaw
3.sure he peed on people that worked for him, but he was a very caring person

[LBJer]

Lyndon Johnson

Why was Johnson "evil"?

LBJ was admittedly a repellent character on a personal level--constant infidelity (including a cavalier attitude towards sexual consent), unkindness to animals, almost-indisputable engagement in election fraud in his Senate primary against the ideologically far worse Coke Stevenson, at least some degree of personal racism despite his antiracist policies as President.

I find your critique here very biased.  Fraud in elections was commonplace in Texas (and other places) at that time.  Given what he did for civil rights, to criticize him for "at least some degree of personal racism" seems incredibly ungenerous--particularly given that whatever racism he had was most likely either less or, at the very least, no worse than most whites of his region and generation.  It's true that Johnson was a hunter, and I've always considered that his worst trait.  As far as infidelity--it's up to each person who's married/engaged/in a relationship to decide whether to be faithful or not.  As long as whoever they have sex with is a consenting adult, I don't take issue with it.  I would like to know what you mean by "a cavalier attitude toward sexual consent," though.


While Johnson could be a very difficult man--very demanding to his staff (as well as his wife), prone to  what George Reedy called "fantastic rages," and at times very crude (he urinated on one of his Secret Service agents at one point), he also had very positive qualities as well.  As Reedy also said, he could be a "big, magnificent, inspiring leader."  He had a colorful sense of humor and genuinely cared about others, both those who were around him and, on a larger scale, those who were disadvantaged--particularly African Americans and other minorities, and those living in poverty.  He was extremely intelligent as well.  

tl:dr version
he was asshole, and also, he wasn't

My favorite parts:
1.sure he was a racist and a fraud, but that just made him typical
2.lying in front of your closest friends and family and swearing to your god that you will be faithful isn't a huge character flaw
3.sure he peed on people that worked for him, but he was a very caring person

So you've produced a "summary" of what I said that grossly distorts it.  Good for you.  But if you dislike LBJ, doing such hardly makes your case.

As to your main points:

Do you dislike Lincoln for being a "racist" by today's standards?

Honestly, I think marriage vows are pretty stupid, so no, I don't consider it a huge character flaw.  And "huge" compared to what? 

I don't see how "peeing on people" and caring about civil rights and fighting poverty are mutually exclusive.

[dead0man]

So you've produced a "summary" of what I said that grossly distorts it.

I disagree

Good for you.  But if you dislike LBJ, doing such hardly makes your case.

As to your main points:

Do you dislike Lincoln for being a "racist" by today's standards?

whataboutism

Honestly, I think marriage vows are pretty stupid, so no, I don't consider it a huge character flaw.  And "huge" compared to what? 

so you agree with my summary here, yet I "grossly distorted" what you said?  Seems like a good summary to me.

I don't see how "peeing on people" and caring about civil rights and fighting poverty are mutually exclusive.

they aren't, but there isn't a lot of overlap on that Venn diagram.

[LBJer]

So you've produced a "summary" of what I said that grossly distorts it.

I disagree

Good for you.  But if you dislike LBJ, doing such hardly makes your case.

As to your main points:

Do you dislike Lincoln for being a "racist" by today's standards?

whataboutism

Honestly, I think marriage vows are pretty stupid, so no, I don't consider it a huge character flaw.  And "huge" compared to what? 

so you agree with my summary here, yet I "grossly distorted" what you said?  Seems like a good summary to me.

I don't see how "peeing on people" and caring about civil rights and fighting poverty are mutually exclusive.

they aren't, but there isn't a lot of overlap on that Venn diagram.

My question about Lincoln wasn't "whataboutism."  If you say you dislike someone for supposedly being, by our standards, a racist, yet you don't dislike someone else who was also a racist by our standards, it's clear that this isn't the real reason you dislike the person.  If you dislike LBJ, just come out and say why.  Whatever the real reason, expressing it is not a crime.

And no, you did not give a "good summary" of what I said about marriage vows and infidelity.  My main point was that regardless of one's opinion on the issue, it's a personal matter--something where one should live and let live.

And I'd much rather have a crude president who had (domestically at least) great policies than one who was a model of refinement but had mediocre or bad ones. 

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Lyndon Johnson

Why was Johnson "evil"?

LBJ was admittedly a repellent character on a personal level--constant infidelity (including a cavalier attitude towards sexual consent), unkindness to animals, almost-indisputable engagement in election fraud in his Senate primary against the ideologically far worse Coke Stevenson, at least some degree of personal racism despite his antiracist policies as President.

I find your critique here very biased.  Fraud in elections was commonplace in Texas (and other places) at that time.  Given what he did for civil rights, to criticize him for "at least some degree of personal racism" seems incredibly ungenerous--particularly given that whatever racism he had was most likely either less or, at the very least, no worse than most whites of his region and generation.  It's true that Johnson was a hunter, and I've always considered that his worst trait.  As far as infidelity--it's up to each person who's married/engaged/in a relationship to decide whether to be faithful or not.  As long as whoever they have sex with is a consenting adult, I don't take issue with it.  I would like to know what you mean by "a cavalier attitude toward sexual consent," though.


While Johnson could be a very difficult man--very demanding to his staff (as well as his wife), prone to  what George Reedy called "fantastic rages," and at times very crude (he urinated on one of his Secret Service agents at one point), he also had very positive qualities as well.  As Reedy also said, he could be a "big, magnificent, inspiring leader."  He had a colorful sense of humor and genuinely cared about others, both those who were around him and, on a larger scale, those who were disadvantaged--particularly African Americans and other minorities, and those living in poverty.  He was extremely intelligent as well. 

This is hilarious.

[LBJer]

Lyndon Johnson

Why was Johnson "evil"?

LBJ was admittedly a repellent character on a personal level--constant infidelity (including a cavalier attitude towards sexual consent), unkindness to animals, almost-indisputable engagement in election fraud in his Senate primary against the ideologically far worse Coke Stevenson, at least some degree of personal racism despite his antiracist policies as President.

I find your critique here very biased.  Fraud in elections was commonplace in Texas (and other places) at that time.  Given what he did for civil rights, to criticize him for "at least some degree of personal racism" seems incredibly ungenerous--particularly given that whatever racism he had was most likely either less or, at the very least, no worse than most whites of his region and generation.  It's true that Johnson was a hunter, and I've always considered that his worst trait.  As far as infidelity--it's up to each person who's married/engaged/in a relationship to decide whether to be faithful or not.  As long as whoever they have sex with is a consenting adult, I don't take issue with it.  I would like to know what you mean by "a cavalier attitude toward sexual consent," though.


While Johnson could be a very difficult man--very demanding to his staff (as well as his wife), prone to  what George Reedy called "fantastic rages," and at times very crude (he urinated on one of his Secret Service agents at one point), he also had very positive qualities as well.  As Reedy also said, he could be a "big, magnificent, inspiring leader."  He had a colorful sense of humor and genuinely cared about others, both those who were around him and, on a larger scale, those who were disadvantaged--particularly African Americans and other minorities, and those living in poverty.  He was extremely intelligent as well. 

This is hilarious.

How so?

[Aurelius]

Leaning Nixon, after he interfered with the Vietnam peace talks while a candidate for his own political advantage. This does not mean I think he's the worst President - I put him in the third quartile. I have a specific definition of evil that doesn't include "ineffective leader" or "has politics I strongly disagree with".

[Aurelius]

Lyndon Johnson

Why was Johnson "evil"?

LBJ was admittedly a repellent character on a personal level--constant infidelity (including a cavalier attitude towards sexual consent), unkindness to animals, almost-indisputable engagement in election fraud in his Senate primary against the ideologically far worse Coke Stevenson, at least some degree of personal racism despite his antiracist policies as President.

I find your critique here very biased.  Fraud in elections was commonplace in Texas (and other places) at that time.  Given what he did for civil rights, to criticize him for "at least some degree of personal racism" seems incredibly ungenerous--particularly given that whatever racism he had was most likely either less or, at the very least, no worse than most whites of his region and generation.  It's true that Johnson was a hunter, and I've always considered that his worst trait.  As far as infidelity--it's up to each person who's married/engaged/in a relationship to decide whether to be faithful or not.  As long as whoever they have sex with is a consenting adult, I don't take issue with it.  I would like to know what you mean by "a cavalier attitude toward sexual consent," though.


While Johnson could be a very difficult man--very demanding to his staff (as well as his wife), prone to  what George Reedy called "fantastic rages," and at times very crude (he urinated on one of his Secret Service agents at one point), he also had very positive qualities as well.  As Reedy also said, he could be a "big, magnificent, inspiring leader."  He had a colorful sense of humor and genuinely cared about others, both those who were around him and, on a larger scale, those who were disadvantaged--particularly African Americans and other minorities, and those living in poverty.  He was extremely intelligent as well. 

This is hilarious.

How so?

Hunting is good, actually.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Andrew Johnson

[Fuzzy Bear]

James Buchanan was a bitter old man who allowed his Secretary of War, Jefferson Davis, to transfer armaments to the Southern states which enabled them to secede and wage secessionist war.  Without Davis's actions with Buchanan's enabling the Civil War would not have happened.