Unpopular Opinion: The distance between us and historical presidents makes it hard for us to recognize how horrible some were, especially if they did at least one thing we like and acted to enhance "American greatness" (the Constitution was not designed for national greatness, in the sense of developing into a military power with a barely constrained central government).
Andew Jackson: The first American president elected on the basis of being a warmonger. The first populist president. Participated in Burr's (alleged) plot to set up an independent country, but covered his own ass to avoid charges while implicating others. Refused to comply with an important Supreme Court ruling. Responsible for Indian removals, including the Trail of Tears. Expanded unilateral executive power.
James Polk: Used a boundary dispute as justification for attacking a neighboring country and stealing more than half its territory, an unjustified war of aggression for territory on par with any in history.
Abraham Lincoln: Yes, the second God in America's pantheon of Presidents. Nobody did more to fundamentally change the American system than he did - before Lincoln, the U.S. was a federation of at least semi-independent states; after him, it no longer was. He ended slavery, yes, but he fought the war for a different purpose; his vision of American greatness.
FDR: The third God in America's pantheon. What Lincoln had begun with destroying state independence, FDR worked to complete. During a fascist era, he adopted fascist economic policies. The only President to be so narcissistic as to see himself so indispensable that he ran for more than two terms. Prolonged the Great Depression, operated in secret to get the U.S. into World War II, and expanded federal control over the states.
LBJ: May have helped JFK win the presidential election through election fraud in Texas. Blatantly lied to Congress to get a blank check for a war America would lose, possibly primarily for the purpose of deterring a primary challenge from Robert F. Kennedy.
Nixon: Spied on Democratic Party HQ to get their electoral strategy, then obstructed justice by trying to use the CIA to get the FBI to stop its investigation on a spurious claim of national security. Later claimed "When the president does it, that means it is not illegal."
Trump: His first term was not as bad as I feared. His incompetence and his preference for looking for easy wins over fighting hard when he faced obstruction, as well as - if we're going to be honest - his distaste for getting the U.S. into more wars, limited the damage done by his authoritarian tendencies.
For all his bullshit about a stolen election, he ultimately did leave the White House on schedule, and he did not try to set up a shadow government. He did not even make vague gestures towards locking up Hillary Clinton, despite his campaign talk.
Contra progressives' breathless panicking, Trump and his team have not announced that they are going to install him as permanent dictactor. However much the idea may tickle his fancy in his fantasy life, all he really wants is redemption, a way to "prove" that he didn't really lose the 2020 election. And in his egotistical way, he's fully aware, I believe, that declaring himself dictator of a country with a two and a half century democratic tradition would make him look bad.
Besides, if he wins he'll take office at age 78 and complete his term at 82. What is dictator-for-life likely to be for him, anyway?
People are also panicking that he has a plan to replace large numbers of the permanent bureaucracy with loyalists.
Shades of Andew Jackson! But remember, the President is constitutionally the head of the Executive Branch, and was intended to have control of it. A permanent bureaucracy that can work its will regardless of election results, with no accountability to the public, is not part of our Constitutional system (although it clearly is part of our constitutional system). There are pragmatic reasons for the Civil Service system, but those who don't recognize its tension with democratic accountability haven't thought seriously about the American political system.
A writer in Mother Jones even called this plan an attack on separation of powers - not understanding, apparently, that the bureaucracy is part of the President's branch, not part of Congress or the Judiciary.
This does not mean I am sanguine about a Trump presidency. But I am actually less worried than I was eight years ago. At the time, I said Hillary would be terrible within normal bounds, but Trump had the potential to be terrible outside those normal bounds. He was in part, but also in part not, and ultimately not the tyrant I feared - mostly, I think, because he's a far weaker and less competent person than I had realized.
He could be worse this time. Again there's talk about jailing his political enemies. But also, he could be satisfied with just winning the election, "proving" (in his mind) that he never actually lost. I think he has far less interest in what he could do with the presidency than he has in just erasing a public humiliation, the one thing more painful to him than anything else could possibly be.
Pretty much anything Democrats denounce in Trump, they do it themselves.
Trump is no worse than others, and WHOEVER is elected in november, government will still be in power
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit