07-01-2021, 06:13 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-01-2021, 06:16 PM by Eric the Green.)
Under Abraham Lincoln, you wrote that Trump gets a #1 rating.
I don't really agree with these historian evaluations, especially because they rate one of the worst presidents, Reagan, as one of the best. I guess they are trying to be ideologically neutral, but I suggest that in the long run, a president with a wrong and destructive ideology is a bad president, even though Reagan was "successful" in imposing this wrong ideology and distorted and destructive "vision" upon us.
Of course Reagan also rates highly in my horoscope scoring of candidates. He has an awesome persuasive ability, which got him elected. Trump doesn't do too badly by this measure either. But I don't see how Trump can be rated as anywhere but as #44. And I disagree with the new high rating of Eisenhower. The mistakes you mentioned brower help sink him in my estimation.
I don't really agree with these historian evaluations, especially because they rate one of the worst presidents, Reagan, as one of the best. I guess they are trying to be ideologically neutral, but I suggest that in the long run, a president with a wrong and destructive ideology is a bad president, even though Reagan was "successful" in imposing this wrong ideology and distorted and destructive "vision" upon us.
Of course Reagan also rates highly in my horoscope scoring of candidates. He has an awesome persuasive ability, which got him elected. Trump doesn't do too badly by this measure either. But I don't see how Trump can be rated as anywhere but as #44. And I disagree with the new high rating of Eisenhower. The mistakes you mentioned brower help sink him in my estimation.