Now listen here, young man, you just need to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and put your head down and get to work. Listen to me, with my advanced age over you.
OK boomer.
Now listen here, young man, you just need to pull yourself up by your bootstraps and put your head down and get to work. Listen to me, with my advanced age over you.
Now listen here, young man, you just need to ... put your head down and get to work. Listen to me, with my advanced age over you.
It'll happen to youuuuuuuuOK boomer.
he should be so lucky.Ooh, kinky.
Putting Obama, Carter, LBJ, FDR, and even Nixon in the same category as a guy who helped barrel the US into a civil war kinda tells me enough that this isn't a serious list. Similarly, I know he's not allowed to substantively criticize the dear leader, but Trump failed to pass any significant legislation beyond barely getting an unpopular tax cut through (and really no thanks to Trump). That's not even getting to the part about how he incited an attack against his own government.Anyway, I've been watching this video of a (very moderately) conservative (Conservative? I never know when to properly use the capital) historian reacting to Shapiro's tierlist of US presidents
I was kinda surprised that Shapiro's tierlist wasn't as unhinged as I'd expect. I'm not saying "not unhinged at all", but mostly kinda reasonable, with the further you get from current politics, the more he just sounds... kinda normal.
So I've been toying with the idea of creating such tierlist myself, but it looks kinda daunting - I mean, I know what presidents I'd put into S-Tier and F-Tier, but the middle rankings, that sounds crazy. Also, it kinda feels somewhat incomparable, how do you compare the 19th century presidents against the 20th? With the stuff they had to deal with, how do you compare Pierce with Harding or Taft with Jefferson? Still, an interesting idea for a discussion, methinks.
@LooseCannon, weren't you working on something like this?So I've been toying with the idea of creating such tierlist myself, but it looks kinda daunting...
Putting Obama, Carter, LBJ, FDR, and even Nixon in the same category as a guy who helped barrel the US into a civil war kinda tells me enough that this isn't a serious list. Similarly, I know he's not allowed to substantively criticize the dear leader, but Trump failed to pass any significant legislation beyond barely getting an unpopular tax cut through (and really no thanks to Trump). That's not even getting to the part about how he incited an attack against his own government.
@LooseCannon, weren't you working on something like this?
I looked at the F tier and saw where he ranked Trump and kinda stopped there. The problem is that everybody has to agree on objective measures to assess each president. I would probably limit it to each president's ability to pass significant legislation during their term, any major events that happened during the presidency and how they handled said event, and if we have any sense of whether they have a positive or negative impact on later history (which you probably have to go back many decades to even begin to have a sense of this). With this in mind, just off the top of my head Obama (ACA), Teddy (National Parks), LBJ (civil rights act) and FDR (WWII) are severely underrated. Particularly regarding healthcare and the parks system, these are things that fundamentally changed American culture and disregarding those just makes me think Shapiro is out of touch with the country he lives in.I get that, though I found putting Teddy in C/D more offensive myself. And I more or less turnt a blind eye towards the last three presidents anyway ('cause that's where I'd expect Shapiro to be most insane). But overall, both the rankings and the reasoning didn't surprise me all that much and I was genuinely surprised that we actually agreed on some (though possibly for a very different reasons).
Also, bear in mind that not only do we all have our biases, this general ranking of things online is - by its very nature - sensational and kinda hot-takish. I'd definitely put Reagan in the F-tier and possibly as the first one; is he really worse than Buchanan or Johnson, or even on the same level? Probably not.* But that's internet for you.
* Despite the fact it was he who actually corrupted conservatism into the mockery that it is even today ... and therefore was one of the orchestrators of the situation today, so his toxic influence might have been worse than Buchanan's or Johnson's... because who else is to blame? Barry Goldwater?
Given that he actually studied history, I would mostly defer to LC's takes on any sort of presidential ranking.
I looked at the F tier and saw where he ranked Trump and kinda stopped there. The problem is that everybody has to agree on objective measures to assess each president. I would probably limit it to each president's ability to pass significant legislation during their term, any major events that happened during the presidency and how they handled said event, and if we have any sense of whether they have a positive or negative impact on later history (which you probably have to go back many decades to even begin to have a sense of this). With this in mind, just off the top of my head Obama (ACA), Teddy (National Parks), LBJ (civil rights act) and FDR (WWII) are severely underrated. Particularly regarding healthcare and the parks system, these are things that fundamentally changed American culture and disregarding those just makes me think Shapiro is out of touch with the country he lives in.
He oversaw the creation of the EPA and OSHA, the passage of the Clean Air Act and other policies aimed at preservation of the environment and natural resources ... worked to reform the American health care system with a proposal that was eerily similar to Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act, though only bits and pieces of it made it through Congress. In [year], he signed into law an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act to raise wages and encompass more employees covered by the law. His administration also helped to advance women's rights, as he supported and oversaw the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment through Congress (even though it failed to achieve ratification after he left office) and oversaw the creation of social programs that expanded girls' athletics and skills training in schools. He also oversaw the ratification of a constitutional amendment that lowered the voting age to 18. He signed the National Cancer Act of [year], which was the first major national effort towards cancer eradication, generally considered to be the starting point of the War on Cancer.
I strongly dislike VTH. For reference, I moderate a Discord server for a moderately prominent Youtube historian (I won't mention it here, because he does not want his opinions to get out on this guy) and the various other Youtubers really dislike how this guy steals their content to add "reaction" videos without even asking. If you want a guy who is middleish of the road, look up Mr. Beat. I don't always agree with Mr. Beat, but I always, always respect his opinion. He's a legitimate high school history teacher.Anyway, I've been watching this video of a (very moderately) conservative (Conservative? I never know when to properly use the capital) historian reacting to Shapiro's tierlist of US presidents
@LooseCannon, weren't you working on something like this?
Yeah, a commented discography is a good way to put it. The idea was to go through the presidents in random order and try to rank them as a group on several different areas. I'm actually still reading presidential biographies, at a slow pace (I'm about 1/8th done) to prepare for the concept. Whether or not we'll get there - as you've noted, the GMSC is going to take precedent.The Survivor concept is not feasible, but I'd be 100 % in for a "Commented discography" of the US presidents with some moderate discussion on the history and the politics; I'm even willing to crack the books and boost meself up for it in preparation, if such an event occured, but between Loosey's responsibilities with the Song Cup, I doubt it will happen.
That said, I can come up with a few ideas pretty quickly. I'd need to fine-tune them, but we could probably get it sorted out, yeah.The problem is that everybody has to agree on objective measures to assess each president.
The good news is that I've been out of university for almost 20 years at this point, but history remains a passion. I read at a high level, including journals, but I also engage with American history and politics at a more grassroots level on a regular, if not daily, basis. So I wouldn't want to give my list as the definitive one - and to be fair, it changes whenever I ponder it - but I think I'm capable of curating the discussion and putting out what needs to be put out from a summary basis, and let the posters determine what works for them.I trust LC's erudition - I'm quite sure he knows more of history than I do - but as someone who has two uni degrees and has been working at a university for the past five years, I simply don't tend to overrate formal college education.
Didn't know about the VTH controversy as I've seen a few of his videos here and there, but absolutely second you on Mr. Beat. The guy's fantastic and always respectable and respectful.I strongly dislike VTH. For reference, I moderate a Discord server for a moderately prominent Youtube historian (I won't mention it here, because he does not want his opinions to get out on this guy) and the various other Youtubers really dislike how this guy steals their content to add "reaction" videos without even asking. If you want a guy who is middleish of the road, look up Mr. Beat. I don't always agree with Mr. Beat, but I always, always respect his opinion. He's a legitimate high school history teacher.
I would definitely follow a presidential discography discussion if it ever happened. Otherwise, I would be curious if you have recommendations for presidential bios as I would like to take on a similar project at some point. I’ve already read McCullough’s Adams and Truman books.I strongly dislike VTH. For reference, I moderate a Discord server for a moderately prominent Youtube historian (I won't mention it here, because he does not want his opinions to get out on this guy) and the various other Youtubers really dislike how this guy steals their content to add "reaction" videos without even asking. If you want a guy who is middleish of the road, look up Mr. Beat. I don't always agree with Mr. Beat, but I always, always respect his opinion. He's a legitimate high school history teacher.
Yeah, a commented discography is a good way to put it. The idea was to go through the presidents in random order and try to rank them as a group on several different areas. I'm actually still reading presidential biographies, at a slow pace (I'm about 1/8th done) to prepare for the concept. Whether or not we'll get there - as you've noted, the GMSC is going to take precedent.
But, to be honest, this conversation has me thinking about how to do it, because this is correct here:
That said, I can come up with a few ideas pretty quickly. I'd need to fine-tune them, but we could probably get it sorted out, yeah.
The good news is that I've been out of university for almost 20 years at this point, but history remains a passion. I read at a high level, including journals, but I also engage with American history and politics at a more grassroots level on a regular, if not daily, basis. So I wouldn't want to give my list as the definitive one - and to be fair, it changes whenever I ponder it - but I think I'm capable of curating the discussion and putting out what needs to be put out from a summary basis, and let the posters determine what works for them.
I strongly dislike VTH. For reference, I moderate a Discord server for a moderately prominent Youtube historian (I won't mention it here, because he does not want his opinions to get out on this guy) and the various other Youtubers really dislike how this guy steals their content to add "reaction" videos without even asking. If you want a guy who is middleish of the road, look up Mr. Beat. I don't always agree with Mr. Beat, but I always, always respect his opinion. He's a legitimate high school history teacher.
Conservative not aligned with Reagan or Trump, intriguing. Not doubting it or anything of the sort, but I find it fascinating.
The good news is that I've been out of university for almost 20 years at this point, but history remains a passion. I read at a high level, including journals, but I also engage with American history and politics at a more grassroots level on a regular, if not daily, basis. So I wouldn't want to give my list as the definitive one - and to be fair, it changes whenever I ponder it - but I think I'm capable of curating the discussion and putting out what needs to be put out from a summary basis, and let the posters determine what works for them.
I would definitely follow a presidential discography discussion if it ever happened. Otherwise, I would be curious if you have recommendations for presidential bios as I would like to take on a similar project at some point. I’ve already read McCullough’s Adams and Truman books.