I am conservative, but will answer this as objectively as possible.
It's tough to answer Bush I or Clinton. Both had far more successes than failures.
Carter, Bush II, Obama, Trump.
Trump is out of the equation as well. It hasn't even been a year so to choose him would be because he is personally disliked, or his abrasiveness, etc. But none of that has anything to do with results. Results are simply not in yet.
With W, you have the financial crisis and the Iraq war. As a conservative, it is tough to overlook those two things. Although, to be fair, the financial issues were not his doing, but he was the one standing when the music stopped. The Iraq war is also tough to single him out for because, prior to it, EVERY prominent Democrat agreed he had WMDs. Both Clintons, Gore, Kerry--every one (except Obama to be fair --but he was not a significant pol at the time as he was really so green) So, if we are being objective, its very likely every one of them would have made them same decision had they been in office at the time. So how can you criticize for a decision that would have been made by any president in the same situation. Fair is fair. So, if you could go back in time and have a different pres, they would have had the same war and the same financial crisis... cant really pin that on the man himself in that case. Yeah, you could say "he knew about Bin Laden's plan" but then again, Clinton could have nailed him years earlier. It is well-documented. And unprecedented.
Well, Obama has healthcare and the "recovery." I cant give much credit for the recovery because, as with the W situation, any president would have taken the same steps he did (big stimulus) And, on top that, it is regarded as the lamest recovery from, lets face it, a common occurence (market turbulence). So, he has healthcare. To me, that is a disaster BUT, a large part of the country supports it so I will, objectively, count this as a plus (cant believe I just said that). I, personally, feel that is his an America-hating racist but that has nothing to do with the objective results which were.. meh.
That leaves peanut head. Not a financial crisis on his time, but malaise--far different. America in a state of, not divided, but depression (not financial). Iran hostages, and only served one term before getting CRUSHED by Reagan.
I will crown Carter as the worst.
But, an honorable mention does go to Obama and the reason is this. Objectively speaking, under his watch, his party was decimated at every level during every election. The only exception was his winning a second term. But aside from that the dems were trounced every time in every place. If the manager of a baseball team saw the team get crushed year after year, lose its best players, not replenish them, and leave his team in a state of disarray never before seen, then he would be considered pretty horrible.
you summed it up for me-practically word for word - except I believe there was most likely voter fraud and thats how Obama got a 2nd term...he was so bad its hard to believe that many peple were indifferent or asleep.
How can Trump be the worst when its been a year. Choosing him is silly and disingenuous. For anyone that chose Trump ask yourself, if this question were posed before Trump were president, who would you pick? W of course. Why? Because the Iraq war and the financial crisis. Now ask, has Trump's year have a worse effect in your mind than that? No?...
Disingenous
There is nothing wrong with hating the man. But if you are not fair in your assessments it is foolish.
It's tough to answer Bush I or Clinton. Both had far more successes than failures.
Carter, Bush II, Obama, Trump.
Trump is out of the equation as well. It hasn't even been a year so to choose him would be because he is personally disliked, or his abrasiveness, etc. But none of that has anything to do with results. Results are simply not in yet.
So that leaves Carter, W, Obama.
So, Carter or Obama.
That leaves peanut head. Not a financial crisis on his time, but malaise--far different. America in a state of, not divided, but depression (not financial). Iran hostages, and only served one term before getting CRUSHED by Reagan.
I will crown Carter as the worst.
But, an honorable mention does go to Obama and the reason is this. Objectively speaking, under his watch, his party was decimated at every level during every election. The only exception was his winning a second term. But aside from that the dems were trounced every time in every place. If the manager of a baseball team saw the team get crushed year after year, lose its best players, not replenish them, and leave his team in a state of disarray never before seen, then he would be considered pretty horrible.
But there was undoubtedly fraud too. We saw that with the Black Panthers blocking voters as well.
Disingenous
There is nothing wrong with hating the man. But if you are not fair in your assessments it is foolish.