Which Twentieth Century US Presidential Election Would You Change

Which US Presidential Election Would You Change


  • Total voters
    91
Dewey in 1944 ... FDR was failing by then, and it took Truman some time to get up to speed on the Soviet threat. Dewey would have known what he was doing vis a vis Moscow.
 
blackangel: I dislike all the ones you mention except Nixon, but we'll have to agree to disagree on him. :cool: The only Democratic Presidents I like are Clinton and Kennedy. BTW, why does everyone hate Nixon? Is it Watergate or something else?

I wouldn't say I "hate" Nixon, but he did terrible damage to the economy long term with wage/price controls and massive spending increases, along with loosening the money supply. I mean, doing all of that stuff worked great for a year or two, but then it backfired spectacularly ... it's like eating a diet of cake and ice cream ... feels great for awhile but eventually the body rebels.
 
Ah yes, 1976. Peanut-Farmer for whom a deranged rabbit posed an existential threat. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: My most loathed POTUS of the 20th C.

I think in the race for most loathed POTUS of the 20th C. among the general public (and not among political stripes), Wilson, Harding, Hoover, LBJ and Nixon would give "peanut farmer" a run for his money.

At least Carter didn't get thousands killed or preside over a massive economic collapse. And no, the late 70s don't count, Abe Lincoln himself would've been fucked over in that four-year-period.
 
Gotta say I voted for TR too. although Carter in 80 was real close. I think the reason people hate Nixon is because of Watergate. If you look at the record, he really was a pretty good president (EPA, China, ending Vietnam etc). On a personal note, you should have included Gore V. Bush, after all that is an election that came down to like 150 votes and still happened in the 20th century. You gotta love Gore in the office and not Bush cause Bush was well a dry drunk, who put into such a lousy position both economically and politically that we are going to spend the better part of my life time fixing it.
 
I voted TR (my favorite president). I think if he was president, WWI either would not have happened, or would have ended by mid 1916 (if started at the same time). Also, Wilson is the reason for the Scopes Monkey Trial, more or less. Could have done without that book....
 

mowque

Banned
I voted TR (my favorite president). I think if he was president, WWI either would not have happened, or would have ended by mid 1916 (if started at the same time). Also, Wilson is the reason for the Scopes Monkey Trial, more or less. Could have done without that book....

Yep but Wilson was also the source of a good bit of positive Progressive legislation.
 
I wouldn't deny that. I think Wilson's 14 points were really fair and very arbitrary (not sure if I'm using the word right). I just don't think he did enough during the war. Although TR would probably be responsible for more American casualties than WW, I think he would also be responsible for less global casualties... possibly even offsetting the Russian Revolution.
 
I voted for TR because first of all he's awsome!!!

And second and most importantly he is the one on the list that possibly could have,
changed our world most decicevly to be better than the world we live in today.

As we all know, many if not most of the problems in the world today have there causes,
as an direct or indirect consequens of ww1 or ww1 part2 (also known as ww2)

True haveing him being president of the usa doesn't garantee that ww1 would change much.
but the mere fact that he had the potential to do so is what gets my vote.

If haveing him as president durring 1912-1916 either butterfly's away ww1 (unlikely)
or causes either side to win quicker and or more decisively.
I think that the world today would be a nicer place,
for the majority of the world's population altough maybe not for everyone.
 

mowque

Banned
I voted for TR because first of all he's awsome!!!

And second and most importantly he is the one on the list that possibly could have,
changed our world most decicevly to be better than the world we live in today.

TR wasn't THAT awesome, guys.

If you ask me, a good number of these would change things more. Taft instead of Wilson?! :eek: Or even Bryan...
 
While Nixon doesn't bother me *that* much when it comes to Republican presidencies, I would rather him have lost to Humphrey in '68. Why? Humphrey probably would have kept NASA running strong, the Great Society even stronger, and would have ended up getting us out of Vietnam as Nixon did. Plus, no loss in faith in government. :D
 
TR and the Progressives in 1912 would have changed the face of American politics forever – introduced a three-party system (or kill off the Republicans who had an almost unbroken 50 year spell in office and got too arrogant for their own good back then), enacted genuine anti-trust legislation, given William Randolph Hearst a good kick in the teeth, campaigned for better social welfare legislation etc.

Instead, whenever there is a move towards social progression in the United States, too many voices scream about anti-Americanism.
 
Top