Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
G@G Community 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
How Do I Look? 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel & Leisure 
Trending & News +16
the left hate Abraham Lincoln didn't you see how they were targeting him next? with C4 and everyrhing
@The_Sal Ah yes, who can forget that terrible day when John Wilkes "Antifa" Booth blew up Abraham Lincoln with a package of C4?
Yes I don't doubt that he was a good president, and I like Jefferson because he was a Francophile lol, I'm talking about Franklin Roosevelt, he's the one who will impose American hegemony in the world which had been prepared by Wilson
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!@Jamie05rhs I think WW I is what made the US a world superpower, so I immediately thought of Teddy. He was president from 1901-1909, expanded the US Navy and sent it around the world to demonstrate our greatly enhanced naval capability. This allowed the US to be a prominent player in WW I and this stake a claim to superpower status.
@OlderAndWiser Good Point. There's definitely a valid argument to be made there.
But @Jonathanlama specified that it was Franklin in a response to @Elliegirl.
@Jamie05rhs Well, he's wrong because FDR's response to the Depression created the entitlement mentality which has ruined or nation: if you have a problem, it is the obligation of the federal government to fix it for you. FDR is the source for most of what is wrong with the US today.
@OlderAndWiser I don't disagree with you there. (Though Johnson also bears a large part of the blame.)
He win the WW1
He wanted to educat thous brats and stop any future war forever and creat an aliat of USA of the same level of power. Franklin Roosevelt, he's the one who will impose American hegemony in the world which had been prepared by Wilson
Roosevelt and Churchil are 2 pice of shit.
They negociate the fate of the Eastern countrys at Ialta whidout caling any reprezentation from thous countrys. They damn dear to treet Stalin like a victim and Roosevelt whas a kity cat vs Stalin who force him to travel all the way from USA to Russia when he know whas in horiblemedical situation, later on he die before winig the war, Truman wan the WW2
Woodrow Wilson and i like olso Linkon, but the first one had the oportunity to change the WORLD
You forget that Roosevelt was ill, and anyway it was he who succeeded in being the great architect of American hegemony over the world. We don't care about kindness, all that matters is to impose our power
Your mistake is to read history through the eyes of the countries of the east, but you have to be honest the great world powers they care little about the countries of the east, if they were interested in their countries it is just to be able to break the Russian influence
That why moust of the historical people from West are traitors for Easterns. Napoleon is a hero for West, enemy for UK and Russia, nobady for Serbs and Greeks...
Except that the Greeks and the French were not at the same world level at that time. But I am an admirer of the Greeks. I am amazed at your respect for Napoleon when many compare him to Hitler
For fighting Russia he get the respect of Romania and Poland ;)
I'm admireing the history of ancient Greek whntile the Roman retreet from Dacia, afther that we didn't care any more about them and because of Ottomans they put some fnars leaders on my country whitch they whas greeks who just pay the tribut, so i can hate Greek for that as well. They didn't give military suport in WW1 and we depand on you France and UK to teach us to fight and give wapens because Greek didn't hold our back. (But here in the Balkan evrybody hate each other no mather what :) )
So i will suport Woodrow Wilson because he wanted to make a world like mine :)
Olso Lincon for fighting for a noble idea and try to get to the people sould whit his words.
You have a naive view of the world, in reality Roosevelt followed Wilson's plan, Wilson's goal was to create American hegemony, Roosevelt to achieve it. You resonate in terms of bad guy or good guy is more complex than that, it's all just a question of power and domination
All European nations, even my country, opposed the plans. The problem was that the senate refused US membership in the National League, and European countries did not consider his plans for the Peace of Versailles.
Franklin Roosevelt is the president who allowed American hegemony, that's not a bad result, right?
That's not necessarily a good thing for the US today. I would have agreed with that perhaps had the US brought back its troops from at least Europe in the early 1990s.
Despite having almost four full terms in office, FDR did very little that actually benefitted the country, and had it not been for World War 2, he likely would be remembered in a much more negative way. Both he and his wife were very big on backdoor dealings and keeping people all the way up to and including his own vice president completely in the dark. In regards to handling the great depression, his policies made recovery much slower than it should've been (similar to Obama's handling of the much more recent economic recovery, except substantially worse), and it was almost certainly intentional in order to justify massive expansions of government, which up to that point had been much less intrusive compared to today. His reaction and preparation leading into WW2 was nothing short of negligent (and would probably see him impeached by modern standards), though to his credit, he handled the actual wartime period reasonably well, and is frankly far better than the rest of his presidency. He also mentored a lot of the slimiest politicians of the 40s-70s, most notably LBJ, who in turn cheated to win his senate seat in 1948.
Jimmy Carter is the one who ruined our social security system. He was certainly a wonderful man, but an ignorant president.
Reagan had wonderful and terrible qualities as president, that's for certain. I believe he was, like Carter, also a wonderful person.
well many many multiple reasons, but mainly his hard stance on poverty, reducing taxes, and standing up ageist Nixon in his running, then his equal rights role but that can be said about quite a few presidents, then he stopped the Cuba getting nukes. Plus he's a democrat that even republicans look back on fondly at least i get the impression they do. Never heard anyone kinda on boths sides complaining about him.
@Noémieclara of course that’s what I meant. Because I’m not capable of intricate, complex thoughts.
@OddBeMe What is complicated? for you, America's greatest president is a man who owns slaves. You have the right no problem.
@Noémieclara and Obama didn’t support lgbt rights until his second term. No ones perfect. I can appreciate the act of a president without accepting all the evil shit. Dumbass.
I thought you were a person who supported movements like Black Lives Matter, you can't on the one hand support movements like that, or by the way they unbolt statues representing slavery, and you, you dare to put a man like George Washington as the best president in American history. Dumbass. Besides, where is the French girl @Jonathanlama, I'm sure she would agree with you
@Noémieclara I can actually. If Robert E Lee spent the rest of his life fighting for civil rights, a statue might be warranted. This is why liberals are hated.
Those were two different presidents.
I don't know who did the term limits, but Abraham Lincoln was the man from Illinois who ended slavery.
The two-term limit was put into place when Harry Truman was president, I’m pretty sure, although it had been a unofficial rule since Washington.
I would argue that the fact that all the factories in Europe being leveled during WWII was the major contributing factor in that.
>Liberals love FDR
>FDR forcibly interned thousands of American citizens just because of their heritage
Oh but his new deal stopped the great depression. No it actually extended the depression and gave America a taste of what socialism was like. And we can also thank FDR for basically supplying China and Russia with the starter packs to become the socialist scourges they would later become.
FDR is why you still have a country that gives you the freedom to bitch about FDR... and to do so in English.
Stop being an idiot.
It's very unbecoming.
did he tho? did he really? or did he happen to preside over the natural growth out of a recession and his policies actually slowed it down?
yeah you're severely brain damaged.
only the left could post something so backwards ands retarded
Economic growth for a few, stagnation or worse for most. A trend that has continued ever since.
@CapitalismFailed there’s been a consistent growth of 2% each year. Under Reagan it was around 6%. But it can be argued that economic growth has very little to do with presidents.
@Jamie05rhs Roma, had problem whit the germanic tribs. Declar Dacia the moust strongast country even afther they incorporate in theyr empire.
Greek olso whas a huge power.
China.
But USA is the first WORL POWER.
You're speaking of Romania, right? Aren't you from there? (I believe we spoke before.)
@Jamie05rhs maby, yes i'm from Romania. The dacians people are the only "barbarian whit statues in Roma. Not other region get so much respect from the Romans
I hope you are American because that will give your voice more credit than mine lol. More seriously, Wilson wanted the American hegemony, Roosevelt to realized it. Alexandru resonates in terms of good or bad, which does not make sense to me because the greatest world powers even if they dress their power in democratic discourse the reality is that there is just power and domination that counts
I agree to a point. I'm actually not opposed to a strong degree of hegemony. Not because I'm opposed to other cultures as a moral, but because I believe democracies are sensitive. I understand that without power, there will always be another power to overrule yours. Is that what you mean?
You guys are starting to bullshiting to much. Winson wanted an United Europ that will be enought strong to not depand on other nation to make peace and end all the war by unificating all the country and give more freedome to all of them
i don't care who whas wilson before, i care about what he reallty wanted to do for my country and others. If Roosveld whas good for USA and bad for my country then he is a shit hole
I understand what he wanted and I agree with that specific sentiment. That alone does not make a great president. Watch the video I posted in this comments section.
I don't care what someone wanted to do, I care about what they did. He attacked American rights and stated policies that lead to many of the nutty left wing philosophies America has today.
@Hogwheels Yes, I will give a concrete example, when France decides to help the United States for their war of independence, France says that she will help the Americans to defend freedom and the cause of an oppressed people, the reality is that France just wants revenge on the English in relation to the Seven Years' War which caused the loss of hegemony of France. I think we have to stop having a naive view of the world, everyone is fighting for their own interests and they are right
I think you're absolutely right that many french bureaucrats just wanted revenge. I think Lafeyette actually believed in freedom.
You two speak from the posts of countries, leaders and partisans.
The USA was not treated as a slave and France was not enslaved since Roman times.
A figure like Napoleon and Wilson who wanted to change something and failed, because there were circumstances outside their power are worth much more than others who did but only at lower levels.
The great powers should not talk about the world as they wish.
Small nations are not your toys, we are not slaves to anyone and we do not accept to be ruled by anyone. If Wilson proposed and took action for the 14 points then it is clear from what he himself presented that he was and will be the best president for the whole WORLD.
@Hogwheels You are right, Lafayette was really sincere. But Lafayette, whom I respect enormously, was a naive man, he thought that freedom was what guide peoples, Napoleon in this sentence about Lafayette, "La Fayette is an eternal political idiot, duped by men and things"
Any great nation that wants to impose itself in front of any other nation will pay the necessary price in blood.
@Jonathanlama, I'm a libertarian. I think big government always, let me repeat, ALWAYS, becomes corrupt. High taxes always leads to kickbacks. More government officials always leads to corrupt lobbying.
Freedom means being able to choose from a multitude of options. Wilson wanted to offer the widest variety of options.
Completely wrong, more people represent a harder majority to control and corrupt. It is said by a person who lived in the country of the last European communist dictator.
Sorry, I misspoke. Yes there are branches of government where more is good. I meant fewer people executing law and policy, and more accountability against those people.
As for legislators, more of them and higher standards for passing law. It should be more than 50%. The filibuster is the only thing holding this country together and the filibuster means nothing if there's no accountability to our president and his executive orders.
What keeps the country united is the will of the people. Because there is a larger group of politicians in a democracy than a dictatorship, this allows information to flow from outside that group. Thus, the people have indirect access to information from offices.
The people decide what needs to be done. The French girl should agree here. Didn't the French Revolution teach you anything?
I agree with you on one point, small nations deserve respect, but Wilson like Roosevelt didn't care about freedom or democracy, he just wanted to impose American power, which is why the Americans stepped in in the world war, the American leaders did not care about the freedom of Europe, but it was the perfect opportunity for Americans to impose themselves in the world
I know the US had hidden interests. But they only imposed the kind of government. They were adapting our continent to a democratic and united system, what will not suit you from those 14 points?
I don't think America's primary goal was spreading democracy. I think Vietnam was about French Corn and Iraq was about oil. I actually see the merits of the Iraq war though. Oil was and probably still is the most valuable currency in the world and who ever controls it has a lot of sway in the world. It would not be good to let the middle east have that sway.
the oil teory from Midle East is just conspiratory teory, USA have the second lages production of oil in the world and the biggest reserv in the world afther Russia, so live me alone whit that one.
But the middle east has more access to trade with Europe and Russia was trying to take rights to the oil, specifically in Syria.
It's imposible to take the Oil from Midle East whidout making conflict whit EU and Russia in the same move. Olso USA have Venezuela more close whith have more oil the Midle East. Is a war for extending the democracy, get a new aliat in the future by suporting a pro USA governament and manage a culture that is persecuted whit medieval rouls
The EU are pansies who would never do anything in retaliation. They'd just have morality meetings where they'd condemn Russia as if that'll get Russia to stop.
@Hogwheels i am 100 percent agree with you, it is precisely the problem european union, the problem is that the countries of the european union have decided to get out of history and just trade and human rights as new religion
AI Bot Choice
Superb Opinion