So I think Ben was listing elected presidents. AJ was never elected president. Vice presidents back then, IIRC were selected much differently than they are now.
Andrew Jonson was elected as vice president he was Lincoln running mate. The change to how vice presidential elections worked was changed in 1805. Gerald Ford is the only unelected president.@@mattm7798
Well that's i believe we've became more interested in Presidents. Like what we learn about FDR is saved us from Depression and lead us through World War Two, Missing Japanese Camps and attempted Supreme Court Packing is missed out.
I live in a small european country that gained its "independence" after WWI so Wilson was always presented to me in school as a good president becouse he supported self determination of nations at versailles.
Hey, VTH even though I personally am left leaning, I have a lot of respect for your opinions and work and its disappointing seeing how things have gotten soo polarizing in recent years where people need to essentially put disclaimers to have their viewers chill out before their videos. Just wanna let you know even though we may not align on some issues politically, you are still one of my favorite youtubers and hope you do not get too much craziness in the comment section. lol Keep up the good work.
This is such a great comment and much needed in this country. I’m somewhat right leaning but I think anyone who’s honest and knowledgeable can see the issues of both sides. I certainly can see many issues in the GOP that I’m not a fan of. I love seeing comments like yours. Have a great day!
It is comforting that people still exist who can put aside political associations and just enjoy quality content, no matter what the creator's leanings. I myself lean center right, with a massive libertarian streak, but that doesn't limit the kind of content I enjoy or consume. Nor should it.
@@joaquinbaca1880liberalism has become a religion and the left is far more extreme like it always has been throughout history. Killing babies , open borders , and deleting the constitution is very extreme.
32:31 There is a subreddit called AskHistorians where they have a rule that questions can't be about something in the last 20 years for this exact reason.
Hey VTH, Michigander here and someone with center left beliefs I’ve always appreciated your honesty and integrity. It’s fine not to agree with you on issues but I love how this channel has such an amazing community where we all love history and check our biases. Please keep the content coming.
Legitimate history sticks to facts. Politics don't necessarily But a historian is not trained in law: "Justice and the Rule of Law are to be ABOVE politics." -- John Adams.
I'm pretty far left but I do enjoy watching VTH. It's a breath of fresh air compared to the right on Twitter. So much blatant racism that's straight out of the 19th century. VTH is one of those people who remind you that there are people on the other side who do want to improve things for everyone.
Someone said that there are two American Political Parties the Evil Party (Democrats) and the Stupid Party (Republicans). And yea pretty much how it is.
Let’s be honest. Voters get what they vote for. People say the parties suck and yet they keep voting for them. It’s like McDonalds. Their burgers are far from great but as long as they keep selling why would they change the recipe? People complain about the political parties in America but as long as they keep voting for them they will have no reason to change.
@@ErikDayne I mean yea, nobody likes Pelosi or McConnell but nobody runs against them nor the votes go against them. But also plays into the fact if someone is running your party well, then why get rid of them.
@erikdayne5429 The thought of "both parties suck" isn't very popular. It's definitely growing, thanks to Biden and Trump, but a vast majority still have their side..their guy. Even if they admit both are bad candidates people still say "Well X may be bad but Y is still worse"
@@thatkristiandude4048But then again, the meaning of conservative can change depending on time. For example: The views of a conservative from say the 1860s can be wildly different from those of a modern day conservative. So while Ben Shapiro is considered a conservative today, back in the 1860s he would be considered a radical liberal.
@@bean420man Not true, he was supporting DeSantis until DeSantis failed to gain support. Shapiro, like most conservatives supports the conservative that has the best chance of winning.
@@maryloumawson6006 They are both basically the same person. Only difference is that DeSantis has no charisma whatsoever, while Trump at least had that. Ben Shapiros' video says everything it needs to and you can't deny that he was brown-nosing Trump at the end.
You and I sit on different ends of the political aisle.. but I think about equidistant from the middle. I very much respect your views, opinions, and arguments. I feel youd be a great person to just sit and talk with. Love your videos, keep it up!
I am 67 and I would say that people were just as polarized in the past as they are today. One difference is the forums for expressing polarization weren't avaiable to people in prior decades, i.e. the internet and cable tv. Political commentary dominates modern life due to technology.
As a younger person I would be interested in hearing more about how things were in prior decades if you are willing. I have had the understanding that before people felt just as strongly and disagreed just as much on any given particular issues. It is just that prion to modern forms of communication groups of people have become more internally consistent in their beliefs rather than more extreme. To make a very non-specific example, today we have a high degree of confidence in what a person's foreign policy and economic views would be if we know their social policy view, but in prior decades it was a lot more common that you could pick any two people from the same party and they would agree on two of those but disagree on a third.
There’s a lot of whitewashing that we get about history that makes the present seem unusually bad. There were “strong opinions about modern politics” even in Washington’s day.
Yeah, things have definitely changed from when I grew up in the 70s & 80s. Most folks got their news and information from the same sources. Technology has made the distribution of info so fragmented that people can't even agree on common facts Back in my youth, pre widespread cable and long before the Internet, most folks got their news from a local paper and from the evening news broadcasts on the 3 major networks. So the same information was distributed in a similar manner, without all the polarizing talking heads inserting their own bias into supposed "news" shows that people watch today. It boggles my mind that some folks watch the news all day everyday for entertainment. Give me a brief summation of the days events and I'm good. I'd rather watch a ballgame or rerun of Gunsmoke then listen to cable news regurgitate the same info all day long
I agree. I think we've always had polarization and the Civil War is a good example. A new wrinkle is the type of communication offered by social media. When you can talk anonymously, not see the face of who you are talking to, the normal social filters (we call that courtesy or politeness) don't apply. The worst of us can come through, and you see it in the comments sections.
Well what would have happened had Woodrow Wilson kept his promise about keeping the United States out of World War I? Imagine if Germany won, France is occupied, Poland doesn't get its independence, Hitler doesn't come to power, as the Kaiser is the chief executive instead, I'm not sure what would have happened with the Russian Revolution, but the German Empire would probably counterbalance Soviet influences assuming there even was a Soviet Union. A victorious Germany in World War I, would not be the sort of Germany that would have made Hitler its leader, I don't think the Kaiser would allow him to anyway!
@@thomaskalbfus2005- Russian Revolution would've still happened. Germany's plan was to bring Lenin to cause political chaos so they can easily invade Russia. It worked for them. Soviet Union would've been wrecked as a country and likely would not achieve world power status. The Treaty of Brest-Litovs saw them lose 25% of their population and while only 10% of the land to Germany, that plot of land accounted for 25% of their industrial power.
@@GlobalWarmingSkeptic I surprised Jefferson Davis didn't make the list, he was an American president, just not a president of the United States, but the Confederate States, he killed nearly three quarters of a million people in his War of secession and he lost! Maybe the Civil War shouldn't have been fought in the first place.
I’ve said it many times, and I’ll say it again, you are such a breath of fresh air. I wish everyone could see things through our historian’s lens, but sadly most people aren’t objective enough (or choose not to be) and completely ignore things such as the political polarization of the time, a president’s situational inheritance, or the fact that great men and generals may not make the best presidents. Case in point, my ancestor, Grant. Thanks for another great video.
Minor quibble, the forced sterilization wasn't straight out of the Nazi playbook, the Nazi's policies came straight out of the American Eugenics' playbook.
One may wonder, if all the hype from FDR and others on how great each was at their Fascism and urge to be the most Supreme, was never done.... Would there have still been the same outcome. Really, it was like complimenting a Pitbull on his overaggressive behavior. Atta Boy?!? The fact they would sign each others books was nuts.
Fun fact about that: at the Nürnberg Trials some Nazis actually pointed to the sterilisation happening in the States in order to defend their own actions. The Americans laughed at that, sentenced them (rightfully so) and went back to the US to continue with these practices until the sixties.
No Johnson because he was a radical conservative just like Ben. If you know who Ben caters to you knew before the video starts he would put Obama even tho he was objectively a top 10 president given the congress he had for 6 years and the Supreme court rulings and the economy he inherited he did a fantastic job.
Hey Chris, this unrelated to this video, but yesterday on our commute to work my wife and i were listening to a podcast that happened to have the topic of Theodore Roosevelt's daughter, Alice, and i used the opportunity to spout out all the fun TR facts and stories ive learned from you over the years. They were met mostly with mild disinterest lol.
I’m slightly left of center and I hate both parties too. As a Georgian, I love Jimmy Carter and think he’s a good man - but I also think he’s a lot better out of office than in it and admire his humanitarian work.
@@davidabramyk2999 I agree. I think Carter means well, but it’s almost like he’s so naively decent that he can’t understand other people can be murderous scumbags.
Bias is mostly irrelevant when it comes to facts. Sure, one's preference is entirely related to their confirmation bias, but that doesn't mean that any given biased perspective is automatically less credible for being biased. Science is biased, in favor of truth. If we're discussing best, worst, which are subjective and opinion based, biased is always something to be considered. But think about it this way, would it make sense for anyone to say George Washington or Lincoln were the worst presidents ever? Would one be biased to disagree? No. At a certain point, biased stops being relevant to the facts of a particular assertion. The effect of biased in one's perception can only be used as a way to show the person something they might have overlooked, usually intentionally. Bias in and of itself does not directly correlate to inaccuracy or untruthfulness. Falsehoods or facts are only pervious to biases in their report, but not in their inherent actuality. This entire point of using bias as a way to discard a particular perspective is poor and overused. Bias can be a detriment to one's point, but it's not the determining factor as to the accuracy of a statement.
@Lufernaal not really. Bias often leads people to ignore certain aspects and heavily emphasive others. And that often comes when talking about something you like/dislike.
25:19 That smile on his face as he realizes he gets to see Woodrow Wilson hate is worth gold. Honestly I was shocked Joe Biden did not make this list but LBJ and Jimmy carter did. On the other hand, I was also shocked to see Ben put Jimmy Carter as a worse president than Andrew Johnson
Well, Johnson tried to abide by what Lincoln wanted while the Radical Republicans wanted blood. Carter did everything through sheer incompetence and/or his liberal ideology, which didn't work nor can it under our Constitution.
I think he didn't put Joe Biden on here because hes still the President at the time of making the video so that doesn't count him. Because yeah, I definitely would have Joe Biden on my list of worst 5 presidents if we discount the whole proximity to current day kind of, rule
I think time will be kinder to Biden. Right now it's easy to criticize Biden for all the things he fails to do, but I do think that history tends to make a President's legacy centered around their foreign policy. While I have countless criticisms for Biden's domestic policy, unless Biden does something extremely outstanding, nobody in 100 years is going to remember any failings in his domestic policy, because that tends to have less of a long-lasting effect on the future than foreign policy. Biden's deficit spending may be disagreeable, but I think people don't really seem to care about deficit spending when they look back at history, as long as the economy was doing relatively okay at the time. And I think Biden's foreign policy has been almost flawless, maybe aside from our relations with Iran. Even if we put the Robert Malley scandal aside, which probably wasn't directly Biden's fault, even though I believe the President has an obligation to be a good judge of character, I think the pro-democracy movement in Iran is mostly being led by the Iranian youth, and therefore until they get into power, it's probably ineffective to be as dovish with Iran as the Democrats historically have been.
@@cameronspence4977 My guy, I was making fun of Ben for always claiming Biden is the worst president in history. I am not on your side. To me he's mid tier, mainly because he doesn't do anything
@youtubeviolatedme7123 His foreign policy has been disastrous. Afghanistan was horribly managed. Russia invaded Ukraine now because Biden said things like, "we won't go to war over a small piece." He's inconsistent on everything, including China and Taiwan. He took the Hoothies off the terrorist list and now has barely responded when they're destroying trade routes in the Red Sea. I don't think he's the worst president, but he's certainly a bad one.
Makes a solid point. Whether you like Biden or not, it does look like the lights are on but no one’s home. John Stewart recently has a hilarious bit about that trump and Biden beating the oldest record that THEY SET lol
I can't say whether he made that face because he didn't agree or because he just thought it was mean towards a sitting president...but for god's sake...even Chris has to be aware Biden doesn't call the shots. You have to be delusional to believe that.
@@livingmaze3094not saying Biden’s better, but can only imagine how chaotic society in this country would be had Trump won in 2020. Feels like Biden winning was the equivalent of putting your thumb on a crack in a leaking dam.
What fascinates me about common american perspective is #1 tendency to tie us economy to the president #2 tendency to tie current us economic performance to current president and not years after
The craziest thing about the video was when on Ben blamed the poverty rate of 2012 on LBJ's policies. How can he connect those, but then say with Trump the economy was booming and he was great for that :D Somehow LBJ was controlling the government all the way up until 2010. That's impressive.
@@B34RHunter Good point. Plus, between 1969 when President Johnson left office and 2012, there was a Republican president for 28 of those 43 years, one of whom he defends in this video (President Bush 43) and one he has praised as one of the best ever, President Reagan. I guess they just couldn't reign in President Johnson's strangle hold on the economy, even decades after his death.
@@B34RHunterthat’s not actually outlandish, the problem for some polices, like LBJ’s Great Society program is that they continue long after the president is out of office. Although you can see negative effects right away, a bad policy in place over a long period of time can progressively get worse. You can blame a bad law passed 50 years on the person who passed it, even if they’re long gone. On the other hand, some policies can have more immediate effect, cutting regulations and taxes can pretty quickly improve an economy, like it did under Trump, while something like a pandemic can quickly tank an economy as well.
@@trevorborwege2408 Surely if the law is that bad. The ones who come after him can try to fix things? And you can't really see that cutting taxes and regulations could have bad long term effects?
The problem with political polarization is that policy is determined by what screws over the other party, rather than what is wise or prudent or right. Holding power is the only important thing, so the other party must be thwarted at every turn. Intransigence is mandatory, compromise impossible.
The Democrats just tried compromising with that border bill, only for the GOP to go back on their word. This is after the GOP went back on their word several times on last year’s budget, among other things.
Excellent point. Although 2 things: being a president that can get things done through dealing with the other party is a very big accomplishment; also sometimes there are wise things to be done that don't necessarily oppose the other party (rare, but sometimes)
I majored in politics in college and the one thing I learned is that every president is a reaction to the prior president. For example Ike was seen as old and disciplined so people then went with a young, charismatic and energetic person in JFK. I believe whoever wins this year is setting us up for a much younger president in 2028
If you think about it, if one party had power and implemented ______, they get voted out and the other party comes in to UNDO what the prior "regime" did (and not just the Presidency). Sooo we "moved forward" then only to go backwards now/again....and here we are.
@@Packham11 He said after Trump or Biden we’ll get someone who is younger. I mean I think we will but that’s because Desantis and Newsom are already planning for 2028
The govt intervention in marriage actually does 2 things 1. Not abandon the child by both parents 2. Make the spouses first heir to each other's properties.
Ben Sharipo's criticisms of Jimmy Carter are very interesting because they are seemed to be VERY focused on America's foreign policies. Like you can totally dislike the current Iranian government (I know I do) but what was America suppose to do during the Iranian revolution? Was America suppose to protect the Iranian Shah's government from the Iranian people?
@roylewithcheese7 Iran literally pays for terrorists groups that attack Israel and say death to America, and Carter wrote speeches for Arafat who was a vicious Jew hater, do you expect Ben Shapiro to not comment on that?
Just like to say, the idea that “I am a Conservative but I hate the Republican Party and what it’s doing” is the freshest opinion I’ve heard in a while. We need more of this. I am a former Republican who realized Conversativism was being consumed by religious extremists and people with zero empathy.
Carter also negotiated in Haiti to avoid the US invasion. We were 2 hours away from boots on the ground when we were given a 24 hour delay. That eventually led to the follow up peace keeping mission.
@@dembert4666 As if an American military intervention would've made it ANY better... You can't just causate a non-intervention around 1980 to something happening almost 40 years later...
I don’t think Carter gets the credit he deserves for giving volker the green light to spike interest rates which helped stabilize the economy in the long term but also basically wrote his second term’s death certificate
Absolutely agree. The reverse can be said about Presidents hailed as economic messiahs by raising the national debt that goes unnoticed by the majority. Like Reagan and Trump. I don't consider Reagan a bad president but did set the bar for national debt increases.
Seeing Carter on this hurts, because while he may not be a great President, but he doesnt deserve to be considered one of the worst, and saying he is a terrible post President feels like slander towards Carter.
he was better than given credit for especially his international accomplishments , partly because Reagan forced IRan to wait to release hostages until he took office as opposed to when Carter was in office as negotiated
@@dturasky19Reagan couldn’t make Iran do anything as he wasn't president yet. Carter also took forever to get the hostages released so the fact he finally did just as he was leaving doesn't change that it is still a disgrace.
Reminder that Ben Shapiro (like myself) is a Modern Orthodox Jew, so we (as a community) aren't fans of Carter when it comes to him sucking up to Arafat sorry we just aren't
Yea I don’t mind him criticizing it but it certainly is biased toward a massive pro Israeli stance like Ben has so with those points I think it’s fair. But he certainly did sweep the habitat for humanity stuff under the rug, that was amazing post presidential stuff right there and I’d easily argue no other post president for quite a long time has done any massive domestic initiative like that. Clinton Bush fund was just a money grab
Jimmy Carter engaged in something that flirts dangerously close to what we used to call Treason. He would fly to other countries without notifying anyone to act as a diplomat on no one's behalf. While the Logan Act is a dead letter and should be repealed; Carter none the less is a proof of concept for it.
As always I appreciate your even handed and compassionate take on history and people. Your first reaction statement on how some presidents get rated lower for simply being average in times where extraordinary leadership is needed is indicative of the measured take and fair approach I love. It feels like many of your highest viewed videos are reactions to people who take a nearly opposite approach. If I didn't know better I would think Shapiro was a satire artist starting his video the way he did. Calling a bunch of historians who's worst lists he doesn't agree with "partisan hacks" and then saying his own opinions are the actual "FACTS" Is like something straight out of a comedy show XD.
About the polarization and echo chambers. You should definetely check the video titled "Metal Gear Solid 2 in 2001 Predicting The Accurate Future". Hideo Kojima made an uncanny prediction.
@@Merble It’s the algorithm-curated “alternative” news part that proved presciently horrifying. The Patriot AI, or at least a serious of them, already control the flow of information to the majority of citizens.
I think it's super important to keep in mind that we have more in common with each other than we don't. We all want to live long happy lives, be in good health, and wish the same for our families. There are so many external entities today that are trying to divide us, scare us, etc.
I've been ostensibly on the left for far longer than I even recognized, and I've always enjoyed your content especially your reconstruction videos. Normally watching critiques of people on the same political spectrum side is either incredibly entertaining or exhausting, but I do like the decorum that you hold when dealing with someone like Ben Shapiro and still acting in good faith. Ben's responses to stuff like this would be like Hellfire to this good community. I wish we had more options so that we wouldn't be at odds. Maybe someday though maybe someday.
In 1980, at the tender age of 21, I became a Reagan Republican. Towards the end of Reagan's second term, I watched an interview with Ted Kennedy. The senator from Massachusetts was asked why he didn’t criticize President Reagan. He responded by saying “the president has been very gracious to my family.” Which was true. In many speeches he praised JFK and honored him. He also did the same with FDR. Imagine political parties respecting each other. Willing to work together for the good of the people. Sadly I don’t ever see that returning…….
Okay say what you will about Jimmy Carter's Presidency but to say he isn't a good post-President is insane. You can't undermine the fact he was literally serving people by building homes and supporting a foundation with his equally great wife designed to help people. That's way more than what can be said for almost every President. Jimmy Carter will go down as my favourite President because of his service to God and humanity. God Bless the Carters!
I watched Ben discuss philosophy, science, and logic broadly in an interview and he absolutely understands these concepts; honestly, I’d even go as far as to say that Ben very clearly has a high iq. The unfortunate thing about this is that it means Ben Shapiro is a cunning opportunist who is disingenuous and not entirely forthcoming about his beliefs
It’s not bias to point out the fact that Carter spent his post-presidency prancing around and certifying the elections of dictators. Carter certified the elections of both Chavez and Maduro in Venezuela, despite widespread reports of “redshirts” and irregularities. He certified elections for the Palestinians, for African dictators, for so many others. It’s a disgrace. I agree with you on LBJ. I’m also a conservative, but I don’t let my political philosophy cloud my assessments from a scholarly perspective. I also agree with you on Obama, whom I think it turns out was actually shielding the country from the forces of BLM, Occupy, and all the rest from the far left that later erupted. I think it’s hard to determine if Carter or Wilson is worse. They’re both strong contenders. Wilson might edge out Carter.
The current "political candidate/leadership problem" is not exclusively a US problem. It is clear here in the UK that the leadership qualities in our most recent politicians is severely lacking; I find it difficult to see any quality leaders in any of the current members of the house of commons- such that I can't see any of them who 'deserve' to be our Prime Minister.What is needed here is Electoral reform to shake up the stale situation with our two party system. I would propose that we dump the "house of lords" as an institution and create a second chamber who's membership is based on the total share of the national vote in a general election. Who gets in this situation elected im not sure, someone suggested to me its comes from a list created initially from the highest ranked people who were not elected and then a party preferred list if not all spaces were filled. However on thing i would like to see is - adding "none of the above" is an option on the ballot in each constituency; and if that option wins , every candidate on that ballot is compulsorily banned from standing for election for 10 years in any constituency. It gives the electorate locally a chance to dispose of the feckless and useless, although its highly unlikely to actually happen; we atleast need an illusion of power and control over these people personally- as the quote goes "governments should be afraid of the people"
You need more parties! To filter out ideological and socioeconomic groups. Its just healthy and a crowbar to go into co-operation. Risk? To much camel swallowing and beuracracy. We in Norway have 9 parties at Storting. Its a nice middle ground. I think the Netherlands have over 20 😂
@@odinulveson9101 2-party-system. Like it or not we can’t get out of voting Democrat or Republicans. I’m a democrat and even I know they aren’t perfect. No wonder everyone says don’t talk about politics because we are already on one of there sides. If both of them wanted to do something there’d be no escape from it to happen. I’ve always wanted to see the US having so many parties that people only look at the one who running and not the house they’re in. You guys have the right idea.
It’s called winner takes all and if you disagree move to a different state with policy’s you agree with😂😂, representative representation in voting will never happen and most don’t want it here either💯
Carter also negotiated the hostage crisis' solution, for what it's worth. He didn't have any say in the matter of the release, which was on the day of Reagan's inauguration.
The Algiers Accords, which frees the hostages, were signed on January 19th, 1981, a day before Carter left office. Carter did do it, people just don't know about it
@@thatkristiandude4048I do think people know about it. What the Carter administration is criticized for is the perceived delayed response to the hostage crisis
The Mullahs were afraid of Reagan. They did not want to be holding US hostages with the Gipper manning the wheel. The timing had everything to do with Reagan.
When I saw the original yesterday and saw that the first two were Carter and Obama and he DIDNT have Andrew Johnson, I knew VTH was gonna have some stuff to say about this list.
Thank you for saying that on gay marriage. I'm a proud gay man, and I've always taken the position that if government wasn't involved I wouldn't care, and if a church doesn't recognize my marriage if I eventually do get married, I disagree but think that they have every right to do so. I was raised Roman Catholic, I technically could still be excommunicated just for sleeping with my boyfriend. As long as someone isn't violent towards me or those I care about, they are free to hold whatever beliefs that they have. I know that when I stand before my maker I have sins to answer for, plenty of them, but being gay isn't one of them.
My biggest concern with your critiques on Ben’s list is that you keep using the word “intention”. What is the road to hell paved with? This isn’t a list of people who had the worst or best intentions. It’s a list of the presidents who had the biggest negative impacts for the United States, and that’s based on their policies and influence.
I have trouble watching this guy, as a prelude to every post he promises to limit interjecting comments but repeatedly does. He’s just one of these people with an overstated sense of self-importance who loves the sound of his own voice
I think if you blame Jimmy Carter for bad economy, you can't then not blame George Bush for great recession considering he was the president for ~8 years before that.
VTH, I tend to be pretty centrist in my opinions (perhaps a bit more left-leaning than you) and I really appreciate how you try to be as objective as you can talking about history and reacting to videos like Shapiro’s. I think Shapiro is a perfect example of someone allowing their personal political views to completely cloud their judgment. Thank you for the work you do and the thoughtful insight that you provide. 👍🏽
I agree with the above comment. Ranking presidents will always have a strong subjective element to it. If you support the idea of universal healthcare, you'd surely have a more positive view on Obama than someone who doesn't. If you are in favour of a larger social state and government regulation of business, you'll think Reagan was terrible. Then again, if you believe in small government and minimal regulation, you'd list Calvin Coolage as one of the best.
Have been watching you for a while and has really captivated me! Despite being a highschool student from india, your videos have helped me learn a lot about us history, and actually make it fun to watch. Keep up the good work!
Great video VTH. As a liberal I try to keep an open mind when watching Ben Shapiro or any conservative video but some his rankings were appalling. Obama wasn't the best President we had but he was no where near the worst.
Ben Shapiro bases a lot of his views on Thomas Sowell principles, and one of the biggest ones is that the effect of policies matters more than the intent. So when you have a Jimmy Carter or LBJ, sure their intentions might not be bad, but the effects are very bad.
Which is a good policy to have. I don't give a damn about Johnson or Carter's intentions, their policies were bad. I elect someone to be president because I want them to do a good job, not because I want him to be a good person
I still can't get over the fact that he pulled a poverty statistic from like 44 years after the Great Society ended. As if there weren't massive changes in welfare policy in that stretch of time
Prediction by having seen Ben Sharpiro several times and not seen this video: his list will be full of Democratic Presidents, maybe one or two Republicans as alibi
I believe both thoughtful conservatives and liberals can find common ground in acknowledging that Jimmy Carter wasn't a particularly effective President, but he's undeniably a great person. He inherited significant challenges and struggled to address them effectively. As for Obama, I've always seen him as a somewhat mediocre President. Shapiro's assertion that Obama is solely responsible for America's troubles is absurd, especially considering his continuation of many of Bush's foreign policies. Obama's tenure was disappointing because he struggled to achieve much, even with a Democrat-controlled Congress, and faced significant gridlock when Republicans gained control. James Buchanan shares similarities with Carter in facing substantial issues without effectively addressing them. Shapiro's dismissal of LBJ's significant achievements is shortsighted, given their historical importance. Wilson was just terrible.
Obama was almost solely responsible for the disintegration of race relations in America. His 2012 campaign essentially lit that fuse, and now we are at a, what, 40-year low in public polling for race relations? His (also shitty) failures abroad don't compare to the domestic failures that have Americans coming apart at the seams.
I always really appreciate the way you disclaim what bias means and what bias you hold going into it. Your disposition is conservative, but you’re not an ideologue, and you use your knowledge to point out nuances here that might be missed or ignored
My Low 5 (in no particular order): Andrew Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, Buchanan, Warren Harding and Franklin Pierce... But again: That's just my opinion :)
Warren Harding is really not that bad of a president, corruption is obviously bad but there's actually no real proof that he was personally involved in it and historians have exaggerated the Ohio Gang far out of line to justify him as one of the worst. I think presidents who committed the trail of tears for example, or ordering a massacre is far worse of a sin than a dude in a cabinet taking kickbacks If you consider Calvin Coolidge to be a good president, there's not a whole lot of reason Warren Harding should be that far back from him
People forget about Pierce. We can't! He was a bastard. John Tyler, very rarely, was an 'okay' president but was inarguably the country's worst post-presidency.
5:36 I as a young Iranian totally agree with Ben about the way Carter put pressure on the Shah and how he treated the revolutionary forces. Compare this with Nixon's review of the Shah and the Iranian revolution. He had a deep and realistic insight into it (there's a great interview with him). I don't think it would've happened if Carter wasn't at the office.
Because he'd have to take off President Obama or President Carter to do that, and people should never forget that Shapiro's goal, first and foremost, is clicks. He knows that outrage generates those sweet, sweet engagement numbers, so he has to start with Presidents people still care about.
@vloggingthroughhistory How can you claim to be objective (and also center right) but state Trump sucks as a candidate? With that in mind, it’s difficult to accept your commentary as unbiased.
Buchanan also went around to ensure Taney's decision was the one that was eventually reached. He didn't need to worry. Also, if he's going to attack the poverty rate, picking out one group instead of the United States sounds like a bit of a dog whistle. The rates he discusses affected the United States similarly, yet he specifically points out black single parent homes. Wilson was for liberating as many people as possible, but only if they were Anglo-Saxons. Re-segregating the government destroyed the black middle class that had been growing based off government work.
What are you talking about? Taney made the decision separate from Buchanan and Dred Scott was the correct decision. No one in 1788 thought blacks were citizens. Wilson wasn't just pro anglo-saxon he wanted self determination for the Irish and slavs and was critical of colonialism. Part of his 14 points was an end to colonialism
While true, it (not a hard rule) generally moderates politics in a nation, wheras with a multi-party (3 or more) system incentivizes extremism because coalitions have to placate (by necessity) their extreme wings.
@@kevinwilde3814 There doesn't seem to be moderation if extremism seeps in to one of the two parties, as it has now in the States. The winner-take-all circumstance of a presidency is very dangerous when you have a party that has turned into what the Republicans have.
@@AdventuresWithAjai With all due respect to Washington's legacy and philosophy, he was incredibly short-sighted when it came to the future of American and quite frankly world political systems. Political parties essentially form the basis of virtually all functioning democracies in the world today, for better or worse. Even if you were to somehow have "non-partisan democracies" where political parties are banned, there would still be political factions within the system (i.e. a Parliament or Congress) that would inevitably mutate into de facto political parties.
The parties essentially act as coalitions. Not all Democrats are the same and neither are the Republicans. In countries that have 3+ parties they'll come together to form coalitions to have bigger numbers to pass bills. If the 2 American parties split up they'd still come together as a coalition and essentially be divided as the same 2 sides.
I love the videos I've seen on your channel... It's really nice to see that you try to be as objective as possible. I think not a lot of people try that at the moment :(
"He had good intentions there." That does not matter as I am sure every president has good intentions in their own minds, but as the saying goes "the path to hell is paved with good intentions."
Your objectivity is so damn refreshing. I hve just had a thirst to listen to someone with the same viewpoint as me. (Haha not in that way) just in that I value objectivity so highly and can set aside my own personal views to see things from other perspectives. I can even argue as devils advocate for issues that I personally disagree with. I also feel the same way about party politics and consider myself center right overall although a bit more liberal on social issues. It’s so hard to find objectivity online so I end up finding myself having to consume content from both ideas of the spectrum so that I can find the real truth myself somewhere in the middle. I know this is history commentary but still just having a new channel I watch that subscribes to the same value of objectivity is truly a breathe of fresh air. And certain diamond in the rough within the context of RUclips and online commentary. Even things that hve nothing to do with politics people just can’t help injecting partisan spins wherever they can. So just being able to hear your opinions on things based just on the facts and not emotion and tribalist leanings (I think this is my 3rd time saying how nice it is lol) is just such a welcome addition to my RUclips learning rotation.
I lived through the Jimmy Carter era. It was bad. I remember being at a bank and overheard the loan officer say to a lady "Aren't you glad you got that mortgage at 17%?" Think about that. 17% interest on a mortgage. Peaked out at around 18.5%.
He is pretty far right my man. You have to understand, nearly all conservative media, TODAY, is extreme right. You don't find many good faith commentators on either side, but the right side is absolutely off the rails. You no longer have people like Wallace, Shepard Smith, and the like, who legitimately told the news and didn't let their extreme biases affect everything they say. Shapiro doesn't say much that makes any kind of sense
@@seanspreckelsen3496 Agreed, I think Ben is perceived as moderate because he is viewed as a conservative intellectual and someone who is open to reason - but he basically supports everything the modern republican party does which is quite far right at this point in time
1. Franklin Pierce - Passed the Kansas/Nebraska Act and greatly increased the risks of a Civil War. 2. Andrew Johnson - His actions restricted reconstruction and paved the way for Jim Crow. 3. James Buchanan - His inactions caused the Civil War relations to get dramatically worse. 4. Woodrow Wilson - created the IRS, federal income tax, and the Fed. The most authoritarian president in U.S. history, with the worst monetary policies. 5. Warren Harding - An interventionist who was corrupt to the core. Worst post-president: John Tyler, but might make some people's top 5 best. That's... unique. Dishonorable mention: FDR is one of my personal top 10 worsts.
1. Pierce had nothing to do with Kansas Nebraska 2. That is a good thing. Reconstruction was unconstitutional. Also Jim Crow existed in the north 3. Again that is constitutional 4. Fair 5. Harding was not interventionist and was not corrupt
@@livingmaze3094 1. Pierce signed the KNA into law. 2. Providing liberties and adding unto the constitution couldn't be more constitutional. 3. Buchanan still failed as a leader to prevent the Civil War, which was unconstitutional. 4. To add to the fact that Wilson was a racist POS, the fact that he brought us into WW1 at the last minute was one of the worst presidential efforts. Ever. 5. Harding was known for his scandals.
@@HaveButOneLife 1. Because he had to 2. Reconstruction was just outright illegal and corrupt 3. what was he suppose to do? And no secession wasn’t unconstitutional 4. Wilson didn’t join WWI last minute. He fought tooth and nail to avoid the war but germany forced their hand with the Zimmerman telegram 5. Harding wasn’t corrupt
@@livingmaze3094do research about the teapot dome. Harding is considered one of the most corrupt presidents of all time. He never wanted to be president and wishes he never became president.
Love watching your channel. I'm someone who identified as somewhat of a centrist historically, but am now finding myself aligning a bit more with center-left (without necessarily changing a lot of my beliefs). This channel often times gives me a lot of great insight & I love that you tackle it relatively objectively while simultaneously also calling out when you may be biased. The sheer fact that I can watch your channel, hear that you state you're a conservative ahead of time, and still see that you place Obama in the mid-20s of president is reflective of the value you place on objectivity. Totally appreciate the content and I'm excited to subscribe.
The " Facts don't care about your feelings" Guy sure got emotional when he was talking about Obama. It's almost like Obama did a lot of work to help out a community that Bennie Boy and his Daily Wire buddies have made an entire career out of hating.
Im conservative and not puting Andrew Johnson on this list is a crime
I hope you don’t mean Andrew Jackson
Ben's probably grateful for the defiance of SCOTUS and the displacement of the natives.
So I think Ben was listing elected presidents. AJ was never elected president. Vice presidents back then, IIRC were selected much differently than they are now.
Andrew Jonson was elected as vice president he was Lincoln running mate. The change to how vice presidential elections worked was changed in 1805. Gerald Ford is the only unelected president.@@mattm7798
@@ErikDayne I said Johnson because he's the reason why Jim Crow even happened
The fact that Woodrow Wilson was for a long time considered one of our better presidents is baffling to me.
Many Presidential “scholars” still rank him highly because they personally agree with his background and methods
People’s perception of political figures changes with hindsight
Letting women vote makes sense
And helped start the process of replacing the british empire as hegemon
Well that's i believe we've became more interested in Presidents. Like what we learn about FDR is saved us from Depression and lead us through World War Two, Missing Japanese Camps and attempted Supreme Court Packing is missed out.
I live in a small european country that gained its "independence" after WWI so Wilson was always presented to me in school as a good president becouse he supported self determination of nations at versailles.
Hey, VTH even though I personally am left leaning, I have a lot of respect for your opinions and work and its disappointing seeing how things have gotten soo polarizing in recent years where people need to essentially put disclaimers to have their viewers chill out before their videos. Just wanna let you know even though we may not align on some issues politically, you are still one of my favorite youtubers and hope you do not get too much craziness in the comment section. lol Keep up the good work.
Much appreciated, and I'm glad you're here.
I second that I usually can't get into conservative content because they ether lean extremely religious or extremely political
This is such a great comment and much needed in this country. I’m somewhat right leaning but I think anyone who’s honest and knowledgeable can see the issues of both sides. I certainly can see many issues in the GOP that I’m not a fan of. I love seeing comments like yours. Have a great day!
It is comforting that people still exist who can put aside political associations and just enjoy quality content, no matter what the creator's leanings.
I myself lean center right, with a massive libertarian streak, but that doesn't limit the kind of content I enjoy or consume. Nor should it.
@@joaquinbaca1880liberalism has become a religion and the left is far more extreme like it always has been throughout history. Killing babies , open borders , and deleting the constitution is very extreme.
32:31 There is a subreddit called AskHistorians where they have a rule that questions can't be about something in the last 20 years for this exact reason.
Yeah but I mean we are delving into a political commentator who discusses current events. Can’t blame Ben for that
@@bbrathizza2075 we can blame him for being a partisan hack
@@DanielKolbinpersonal feelings are to be kept out sir, follow the rules.
Shapiro is not a historian, he's a political commentator. So he can ignore rules (or anything) he doesn't like when it comes to history.
Same with the history memes subreddit actually. Anything within the past 20 years is forbidden.
As someone on the left, I always enjoy hearing your opinions on modern politics, and the way in which you engage with modern opinions.
Hope you get help soon
GET AWAY FROM THE LEFT PLEASE, i was once a libreal and i was so stupid then
@@HerrJaeger64😭
100%
Based pfp
Hey VTH, Michigander here and someone with center left beliefs I’ve always appreciated your honesty and integrity. It’s fine not to agree with you on issues but I love how this channel has such an amazing community where we all love history and check our biases. Please keep the content coming.
I feel the exact same way man, I'd argue I'm far left myself and love watch VTH
Legitimate history sticks to facts. Politics don't necessarily
But a historian is not trained in law:
"Justice and the Rule of Law are to be ABOVE politics." -- John Adams.
I'm pretty far left but I do enjoy watching VTH. It's a breath of fresh air compared to the right on Twitter. So much blatant racism that's straight out of the 19th century. VTH is one of those people who remind you that there are people on the other side who do want to improve things for everyone.
I’m also a center left independent and love your nuanced approach of discussing history.
@@JHZech VTH is a leftist
"I hate both major political parties in this country I think they both suck"
Easiest sub of my life 👍
Someone said that there are two American Political Parties the Evil Party (Democrats) and the Stupid Party (Republicans). And yea pretty much how it is.
Conservative or Liberal, this is something we should all agree on.
Let’s be honest. Voters get what they vote for. People say the parties suck and yet they keep voting for them. It’s like McDonalds. Their burgers are far from great but as long as they keep selling why would they change the recipe? People complain about the political parties in America but as long as they keep voting for them they will have no reason to change.
@@ErikDayne I mean yea, nobody likes Pelosi or McConnell but nobody runs against them nor the votes go against them. But also plays into the fact if someone is running your party well, then why get rid of them.
@erikdayne5429 The thought of "both parties suck" isn't very popular. It's definitely growing, thanks to Biden and Trump, but a vast majority still have their side..their guy. Even if they admit both are bad candidates people still say "Well X may be bad but Y is still worse"
It's weird that he seemed to restrict his list to Presidents in the "Democratic Party" but completely forgot about Andrew Johnson
Back then, Democrats were the conservative party so it would make sense that Shapiro would agree with Johnson at least somewhat
He's Ben Shapiro; what do you expect? We all see how he practically worshiped the ground Trump walks on at the end.
@@thatkristiandude4048But then again, the meaning of conservative can change depending on time. For example: The views of a conservative from say the 1860s can be wildly different from those of a modern day conservative. So while Ben Shapiro is considered a conservative today, back in the 1860s he would be considered a radical liberal.
@@bean420man Not true, he was supporting DeSantis until DeSantis failed to gain support. Shapiro, like most conservatives supports the conservative that has the best chance of winning.
@@maryloumawson6006 They are both basically the same person. Only difference is that DeSantis has no charisma whatsoever, while Trump at least had that. Ben Shapiros' video says everything it needs to and you can't deny that he was brown-nosing Trump at the end.
You and I sit on different ends of the political aisle.. but I think about equidistant from the middle. I very much respect your views, opinions, and arguments. I feel youd be a great person to just sit and talk with. Love your videos, keep it up!
I'm so happy to see this channel doing so well. I've been a subscriber for awhile now!
I’m glad as well
I am 67 and I would say that people were just as polarized in the past as they are today. One difference is the forums for expressing polarization weren't avaiable to people in prior decades, i.e. the internet and cable tv. Political commentary dominates modern life due to technology.
As a younger person I would be interested in hearing more about how things were in prior decades if you are willing. I have had the understanding that before people felt just as strongly and disagreed just as much on any given particular issues. It is just that prion to modern forms of communication groups of people have become more internally consistent in their beliefs rather than more extreme. To make a very non-specific example, today we have a high degree of confidence in what a person's foreign policy and economic views would be if we know their social policy view, but in prior decades it was a lot more common that you could pick any two people from the same party and they would agree on two of those but disagree on a third.
There’s a lot of whitewashing that we get about history that makes the present seem unusually bad.
There were “strong opinions about modern politics” even in Washington’s day.
Yeah, things have definitely changed from when I grew up in the 70s & 80s. Most folks got their news and information from the same sources. Technology has made the distribution of info so fragmented that people can't even agree on common facts
Back in my youth, pre widespread cable and long before the Internet, most folks got their news from a local paper and from the evening news broadcasts on the 3 major networks. So the same information was distributed in a similar manner, without all the polarizing talking heads inserting their own bias into supposed "news" shows that people watch today.
It boggles my mind that some folks watch the news all day everyday for entertainment. Give me a brief summation of the days events and I'm good. I'd rather watch a ballgame or rerun of Gunsmoke then listen to cable news regurgitate the same info all day long
I agree. I think we've always had polarization and the Civil War is a good example. A new wrinkle is the type of communication offered by social media. When you can talk anonymously, not see the face of who you are talking to, the normal social filters (we call that courtesy or politeness) don't apply. The worst of us can come through, and you see it in the comments sections.
Cable has been around for 30-40 years
It’s going to be an interesting video when it starts with “I’m not sure what I’m doing here.”
That's how some of my most memorable nights of my 20s started.
That grin that came across his face when Woodrow came up as number 1 has me dying 😂
His eyebrow raise 😂
Well what would have happened had Woodrow Wilson kept his promise about keeping the United States out of World War I? Imagine if Germany won, France is occupied, Poland doesn't get its independence, Hitler doesn't come to power, as the Kaiser is the chief executive instead, I'm not sure what would have happened with the Russian Revolution, but the German Empire would probably counterbalance Soviet influences assuming there even was a Soviet Union. A victorious Germany in World War I, would not be the sort of Germany that would have made Hitler its leader, I don't think the Kaiser would allow him to anyway!
@@thomaskalbfus2005- Russian Revolution would've still happened. Germany's plan was to bring Lenin to cause political chaos so they can easily invade Russia. It worked for them. Soviet Union would've been wrecked as a country and likely would not achieve world power status. The Treaty of Brest-Litovs saw them lose 25% of their population and while only 10% of the land to Germany, that plot of land accounted for 25% of their industrial power.
Woodrow Wilson was a bad president, but not near the worst.
@@GlobalWarmingSkeptic I surprised Jefferson Davis didn't make the list, he was an American president, just not a president of the United States, but the Confederate States, he killed nearly three quarters of a million people in his War of secession and he lost! Maybe the Civil War shouldn't have been fought in the first place.
"350 million people in the country and those two are the best you can come up with?"... 100% true, 200% real
I’ve said it many times, and I’ll say it again, you are such a breath of fresh air. I wish everyone could see things through our historian’s lens, but sadly most people aren’t objective enough (or choose not to be) and completely ignore things such as the political polarization of the time, a president’s situational inheritance, or the fact that great men and generals may not make the best presidents. Case in point, my ancestor, Grant. Thanks for another great video.
Minor quibble, the forced sterilization wasn't straight out of the Nazi playbook, the Nazi's policies came straight out of the American Eugenics' playbook.
One may wonder, if all the hype from FDR and others on how great each was at their Fascism and urge to be the most Supreme, was never done....
Would there have still been the same outcome.
Really, it was like complimenting a Pitbull on his overaggressive behavior. Atta Boy?!?
The fact they would sign each others books was nuts.
Eugenics were practiced before America, they didn't invent it.
Margaret Sanger...that wonderful women who gave us Planned Parenthood. There's a reason it was called "Planned".
Fun fact about that: at the Nürnberg Trials some Nazis actually pointed to the sterilisation happening in the States in order to defend their own actions. The Americans laughed at that, sentenced them (rightfully so) and went back to the US to continue with these practices until the sixties.
True
No Andrew Johnson? Why? Carter and Obama, but no Johnson. That's crazy.
I think he included him as one of the worst presidents in his tier list a few years ago. Just not top 5.
He put Johnson, just the wrong Johnson lol
@@DesertEagle093 I think his justification for LBJ is at least understandable.
No Johnson because he was a radical conservative just like Ben. If you know who Ben caters to you knew before the video starts he would put Obama even tho he was objectively a top 10 president given the congress he had for 6 years and the Supreme court rulings and the economy he inherited he did a fantastic job.
@@sunkings5972 Obama is not top 10 lol no way in hell
Hey Chris, this unrelated to this video, but yesterday on our commute to work my wife and i were listening to a podcast that happened to have the topic of Theodore Roosevelt's daughter, Alice, and i used the opportunity to spout out all the fun TR facts and stories ive learned from you over the years. They were met mostly with mild disinterest lol.
It is so refreshing to listen to someone unbiased (as possible), Subbed!
I’m slightly left of center and I hate both parties too.
As a Georgian, I love Jimmy Carter and think he’s a good man - but I also think he’s a lot better out of office than in it and admire his humanitarian work.
Domestically I agree with you. But whenever he got involved in foreign affairs and camp David had a lot of problem in fawning over Arafat.
@@davidabramyk2999 I agree. I think Carter means well, but it’s almost like he’s so naively decent that he can’t understand other people can be murderous scumbags.
Including Obama/Carter in the top 5 and not Andrew Johnson is absolutely wild
Absolutely biased. The word you want is 'biased'
Unfortunately that would make the most sense but knowing Ben Shapiro's view of the world, Andrew Johnson probably has a higher ranking than FDR.
@@IowanMatthew683 He would rank Andrew Johnson 6th or 7th. He ranked him as an F rated president.
@@Merble He would rank Andrew Johnson 6th or 7th. He ranked him as an F rated president in the tier list video
It's a symptom of him pandering to his audience. It's classic Shapiro.
Love your intro on bias, it’s such an important aspect to studying history that I think gets overlooked quite often in the public consciousness
Bias is mostly irrelevant when it comes to facts. Sure, one's preference is entirely related to their confirmation bias, but that doesn't mean that any given biased perspective is automatically less credible for being biased. Science is biased, in favor of truth.
If we're discussing best, worst, which are subjective and opinion based, biased is always something to be considered. But think about it this way, would it make sense for anyone to say George Washington or Lincoln were the worst presidents ever? Would one be biased to disagree? No. At a certain point, biased stops being relevant to the facts of a particular assertion. The effect of biased in one's perception can only be used as a way to show the person something they might have overlooked, usually intentionally. Bias in and of itself does not directly correlate to inaccuracy or untruthfulness. Falsehoods or facts are only pervious to biases in their report, but not in their inherent actuality.
This entire point of using bias as a way to discard a particular perspective is poor and overused. Bias can be a detriment to one's point, but it's not the determining factor as to the accuracy of a statement.
@Lufernaal not really. Bias often leads people to ignore certain aspects and heavily emphasive others. And that often comes when talking about something you like/dislike.
Nuance on RUclips is a canteen in the desert. Love and appreciate your voice on material like this, Chris. Keep it up :)
25:19 That smile on his face as he realizes he gets to see Woodrow Wilson hate is worth gold. Honestly I was shocked Joe Biden did not make this list but LBJ and Jimmy carter did. On the other hand, I was also shocked to see Ben put Jimmy Carter as a worse president than Andrew Johnson
Well, Johnson tried to abide by what Lincoln wanted while the Radical Republicans wanted blood. Carter did everything through sheer incompetence and/or his liberal ideology, which didn't work nor can it under our Constitution.
I think he didn't put Joe Biden on here because hes still the President at the time of making the video so that doesn't count him. Because yeah, I definitely would have Joe Biden on my list of worst 5 presidents if we discount the whole proximity to current day kind of, rule
I think time will be kinder to Biden.
Right now it's easy to criticize Biden for all the things he fails to do, but I do think that history tends to make a President's legacy centered around their foreign policy. While I have countless criticisms for Biden's domestic policy, unless Biden does something extremely outstanding, nobody in 100 years is going to remember any failings in his domestic policy, because that tends to have less of a long-lasting effect on the future than foreign policy. Biden's deficit spending may be disagreeable, but I think people don't really seem to care about deficit spending when they look back at history, as long as the economy was doing relatively okay at the time.
And I think Biden's foreign policy has been almost flawless, maybe aside from our relations with Iran. Even if we put the Robert Malley scandal aside, which probably wasn't directly Biden's fault, even though I believe the President has an obligation to be a good judge of character, I think the pro-democracy movement in Iran is mostly being led by the Iranian youth, and therefore until they get into power, it's probably ineffective to be as dovish with Iran as the Democrats historically have been.
@@cameronspence4977 My guy, I was making fun of Ben for always claiming Biden is the worst president in history. I am not on your side. To me he's mid tier, mainly because he doesn't do anything
@youtubeviolatedme7123 His foreign policy has been disastrous. Afghanistan was horribly managed. Russia invaded Ukraine now because Biden said things like, "we won't go to war over a small piece." He's inconsistent on everything, including China and Taiwan. He took the Hoothies off the terrorist list and now has barely responded when they're destroying trade routes in the Red Sea. I don't think he's the worst president, but he's certainly a bad one.
Chris’ face when Ben shows Biden after saying Wilson wasn’t even in charge of his own administration 😂😂😂😂 I’m dying
Makes a solid point. Whether you like Biden or not, it does look like the lights are on but no one’s home. John Stewart recently has a hilarious bit about that trump and Biden beating the oldest record that THEY SET lol
@@davidabramyk2999 Gee if only Trump could’ve won in 2020 so we wouldn’t have either of them…
I can't say whether he made that face because he didn't agree or because he just thought it was mean towards a sitting president...but for god's sake...even Chris has to be aware Biden doesn't call the shots. You have to be delusional to believe that.
@@livingmaze3094not saying Biden’s better, but can only imagine how chaotic society in this country would be had Trump won in 2020. Feels like Biden winning was the equivalent of putting your thumb on a crack in a leaking dam.
@@livingmaze3094let’s not vote for either of them
What fascinates me about common american perspective is
#1 tendency to tie us economy to the president
#2 tendency to tie current us economic performance to current president and not years after
The craziest thing about the video was when on Ben blamed the poverty rate of 2012 on LBJ's policies. How can he connect those, but then say with Trump the economy was booming and he was great for that :D Somehow LBJ was controlling the government all the way up until 2010. That's impressive.
@@B34RHunter Good point. Plus, between 1969 when President Johnson left office and 2012, there was a Republican president for 28 of those 43 years, one of whom he defends in this video (President Bush 43) and one he has praised as one of the best ever, President Reagan. I guess they just couldn't reign in President Johnson's strangle hold on the economy, even decades after his death.
@hughscottiv you are exactly correct on that last point. They couldn't.
@@B34RHunterthat’s not actually outlandish, the problem for some polices, like LBJ’s Great Society program is that they continue long after the president is out of office. Although you can see negative effects right away, a bad policy in place over a long period of time can progressively get worse. You can blame a bad law passed 50 years on the person who passed it, even if they’re long gone.
On the other hand, some policies can have more immediate effect, cutting regulations and taxes can pretty quickly improve an economy, like it did under Trump, while something like a pandemic can quickly tank an economy as well.
@@trevorborwege2408 Surely if the law is that bad. The ones who come after him can try to fix things? And you can't really see that cutting taxes and regulations could have bad long term effects?
The problem with political polarization is that policy is determined by what screws over the other party, rather than what is wise or prudent or right. Holding power is the only important thing, so the other party must be thwarted at every turn. Intransigence is mandatory, compromise impossible.
Compromise is not just impossible, it's a sign of weakness to even entertain the idea.
So any pretention of negotiation is just angling for advantage- if not now, later.
@@hughscottiv Because the democrats have terrible ideas
The Democrats just tried compromising with that border bill, only for the GOP to go back on their word. This is after the GOP went back on their word several times on last year’s budget, among other things.
Excellent point. Although 2 things: being a president that can get things done through dealing with the other party is a very big accomplishment; also sometimes there are wise things to be done that don't necessarily oppose the other party (rare, but sometimes)
I majored in politics in college and the one thing I learned is that every president is a reaction to the prior president. For example Ike was seen as old and disciplined so people then went with a young, charismatic and energetic person in JFK. I believe whoever wins this year is setting us up for a much younger president in 2028
If you think about it, if one party had power and implemented ______, they get voted out and the other party comes in to UNDO what the prior "regime" did (and not just the Presidency). Sooo we "moved forward" then only to go backwards now/again....and here we are.
That’s not always the case. Clinton, Bush and Obama were all similar ages
@@livingmaze3094not just about ages but ideologies too
@@Packham11 He said after Trump or Biden we’ll get someone who is younger. I mean I think we will but that’s because Desantis and Newsom are already planning for 2028
@@livingmaze3094desantis shot himself in the foot
The govt intervention in marriage actually does 2 things
1. Not abandon the child by both parents
2. Make the spouses first heir to each other's properties.
Ben Sharipo's criticisms of Jimmy Carter are very interesting because they are seemed to be VERY focused on America's foreign policies. Like you can totally dislike the current Iranian government (I know I do) but what was America suppose to do during the Iranian revolution? Was America suppose to protect the Iranian Shah's government from the Iranian people?
Especially when CIA propped the Shah which Chris has covered in other reactions.
Right, the only Presidents you could blame for that would be Dwight D. Eisenhower and/or Truman.
They signed off on Operation Ajax after all.
Right, the only Presidents you could blame for that would be Dwight D. Eisenhower and/or Truman.
They signed off on Operation Ajax after all.
@@jeffslote9671 well I’m a believer of self determination so I have to disagree with you.
@roylewithcheese7 Iran literally pays for terrorists groups that attack Israel and say death to America, and Carter wrote speeches for Arafat who was a vicious Jew hater, do you expect Ben Shapiro to not comment on that?
I discovered your channel in 2022 with your reaction to Ben's rannkings so this is a full circle viewing expereince.
I love how you break down the nuance of the presidential terms. I always think how I myself would best respond to the nation's issues.
Just like to say, the idea that “I am a Conservative but I hate the Republican Party and what it’s doing” is the freshest opinion I’ve heard in a while. We need more of this. I am a former Republican who realized Conversativism was being consumed by religious extremists and people with zero empathy.
Carter also negotiated in Haiti to avoid the US invasion. We were 2 hours away from boots on the ground when we were given a 24 hour delay. That eventually led to the follow up peace keeping mission.
And how has that worked out? Yet another failure of President Peanut.
And how has that turned out for them
@@dembert4666 As if an American military intervention would've made it ANY better...
You can't just causate a non-intervention around 1980 to something happening almost 40 years later...
I don’t think Carter gets the credit he deserves for giving volker the green light to spike interest rates which helped stabilize the economy in the long term but also basically wrote his second term’s death certificate
Agreed. Carter at the time was a horrible president, but if you look into the future, he wasn't as bad as people say he was
Also the first prez ever to enforce any degree of international human rights. Won a Nobel prize for it
Absolutely agree. The reverse can be said about Presidents hailed as economic messiahs by raising the national debt that goes unnoticed by the majority. Like Reagan and Trump. I don't consider Reagan a bad president but did set the bar for national debt increases.
Yes! Thank you!
Actually, in his Presidential Tier list, Ben Shapiro mentions Reagan and 'his' fed chief Volker fixing the economy.
Seeing Carter on this hurts, because while he may not be a great President, but he doesnt deserve to be considered one of the worst, and saying he is a terrible post President feels like slander towards Carter.
he was better than given credit for especially his international accomplishments , partly because Reagan forced IRan to wait to release hostages until he took office as opposed to when Carter was in office as negotiated
That's Ben Shapiro for you, he's incredibly illogical and biased despite his supposedly "facts over feelings" stance.
I'll put Carter over Obama.
@@dturasky19Reagan couldn’t make Iran do anything as he wasn't president yet. Carter also took forever to get the hostages released so the fact he finally did just as he was leaving doesn't change that it is still a disgrace.
Ben is just bitter because Carter criticizes his beloved Israel as a post President
Critizicing Jimmy Carter's post-presidency is wild
Reminder that Ben Shapiro (like myself) is a Modern Orthodox Jew, so we (as a community) aren't fans of Carter when it comes to him sucking up to Arafat sorry we just aren't
He didn't criticize his charity work, he criticized his post-presidency political work like... as noted here... meeting with Hamas leaders.
Yea I don’t mind him criticizing it but it certainly is biased toward a massive pro Israeli stance like Ben has so with those points I think it’s fair. But he certainly did sweep the habitat for humanity stuff under the rug, that was amazing post presidential stuff right there and I’d easily argue no other post president for quite a long time has done any massive domestic initiative like that. Clinton Bush fund was just a money grab
It was the hottest of takes! 😂
Jimmy Carter engaged in something that flirts dangerously close to what we used to call Treason. He would fly to other countries without notifying anyone to act as a diplomat on no one's behalf. While the Logan Act is a dead letter and should be repealed; Carter none the less is a proof of concept for it.
As always I appreciate your even handed and compassionate take on history and people. Your first reaction statement on how some presidents get rated lower for simply being average in times where extraordinary leadership is needed is indicative of the measured take and fair approach I love.
It feels like many of your highest viewed videos are reactions to people who take a nearly opposite approach. If I didn't know better I would think Shapiro was a satire artist starting his video the way he did. Calling a bunch of historians who's worst lists he doesn't agree with "partisan hacks" and then saying his own opinions are the actual "FACTS" Is like something straight out of a comedy show XD.
The Ben Shapiro Tier List reaction is actually the video that introduced me to the channel.
I'm late for this comment but same
About the polarization and echo chambers. You should definetely check the video titled "Metal Gear Solid 2 in 2001 Predicting The Accurate Future". Hideo Kojima made an uncanny prediction.
As a huge MGS fan seeing VTH reacting to anything about the series would be wild, maybe even relating to the history involved in MGS3
We will create Context. No one is right, but everyone is validated.
@@Merble
It’s the algorithm-curated “alternative” news part that proved presciently horrifying. The Patriot AI, or at least a serious of them, already control the flow of information to the majority of citizens.
I think it's super important to keep in mind that we have more in common with each other than we don't. We all want to live long happy lives, be in good health, and wish the same for our families. There are so many external entities today that are trying to divide us, scare us, etc.
starting with "I'm not sure what I'm doing here" made me audibly laugh lol. Never change, chris!
The fact that Jimmy Carter and Obama are on this list instead of Andrew Johnson and Franklin Pierce is astonishing to me
I don’t understand what’s so bad abt obama
@ that’s what I’m saying. Him putting Obama on this list when their are far worse presidents is stupid
I've been ostensibly on the left for far longer than I even recognized, and I've always enjoyed your content especially your reconstruction videos. Normally watching critiques of people on the same political spectrum side is either incredibly entertaining or exhausting, but I do like the decorum that you hold when dealing with someone like Ben Shapiro and still acting in good faith.
Ben's responses to stuff like this would be like Hellfire to this good community. I wish we had more options so that we wouldn't be at odds. Maybe someday though maybe someday.
I could tell when I saw your profile picture.
This wasn't the 5 worst presidents, it was 5 presidents I don't like
Honestly that's how most of Shapiro's videos are. Blatantly pandering to his conservative audience and telling them what they want to hear
Well 2 of them are the worst
@@thatkristiandude4048To his credit he does not believe the 2020 election was stolen. You’d be astonished by the hate he gets for saying that
@@williamwallaceoftheus8033 Buchanan and Wilson were the only two that belonged in the video
@@thatkristiandude4048 Exactly. Carter maybe top 10 but not 5
“I’m not sure what I’m doing here….” quite the encouraging cold open lol
In 1980, at the tender age of 21, I became a Reagan Republican. Towards the end of Reagan's second term, I watched an interview with Ted Kennedy. The senator from Massachusetts was asked why he didn’t criticize President Reagan. He responded by saying “the president has been very gracious to my family.” Which was true. In many speeches he praised JFK and honored him. He also did the same with FDR. Imagine political parties respecting each other. Willing to work together for the good of the people. Sadly I don’t ever see that returning…….
I'm center-left and I have a great deal of respect for you and your channel, your knowledge is awesome.
You think LBJ had good intentions? Wasn’t he on record as saying the entire effort was to buy the black vote forever?
Yeah that’s way off. Morally, he might be up there with one of the worst
VTH always does perfect commentary about politics. Always respectful and always professional.
Okay say what you will about Jimmy Carter's Presidency but to say he isn't a good post-President is insane. You can't undermine the fact he was literally serving people by building homes and supporting a foundation with his equally great wife designed to help people. That's way more than what can be said for almost every President. Jimmy Carter will go down as my favourite President because of his service to God and humanity. God Bless the Carters!
He sucked up to Islamists and antisemites. But yeah he built some homes and took money from Qatar
Note that Benny didn't elaborate on what made Jimmy Carter a bad person. Unless of course Ben Shapiro hates charity (he does)
@@avarice25 Uhhh ben literally listed out why he didn't like his post-presidency. You don't have to agree with it but he did.
Carter is a good man but Obama is garbage.
how his Service to God worked with sympithizing with terrorists like yasser arafat?
Ben needs to learn that correlation does not equal causation
Oh he knows that, he just ignores it when convenient
@@varys4992for a guy who’s catch phrase is “facts don’t care about your feelings” he sure does like to ignore a lot of facts for his own agenda
Exactly. We need to be kinder towards W then
I watched Ben discuss philosophy, science, and logic broadly in an interview and he absolutely understands these concepts; honestly, I’d even go as far as to say that Ben very clearly has a high iq.
The unfortunate thing about this is that it means Ben Shapiro is a cunning opportunist who is disingenuous and not entirely forthcoming about his beliefs
@@dream1430why is he disingenuous? Why associate malice? Shapiro doesnt pretend to be objective. He's conservative.
It’s not bias to point out the fact that Carter spent his post-presidency prancing around and certifying the elections of dictators. Carter certified the elections of both Chavez and Maduro in Venezuela, despite widespread reports of “redshirts” and irregularities. He certified elections for the Palestinians, for African dictators, for so many others. It’s a disgrace.
I agree with you on LBJ. I’m also a conservative, but I don’t let my political philosophy cloud my assessments from a scholarly perspective. I also agree with you on Obama, whom I think it turns out was actually shielding the country from the forces of BLM, Occupy, and all the rest from the far left that later erupted.
I think it’s hard to determine if Carter or Wilson is worse. They’re both strong contenders. Wilson might edge out Carter.
I think it’s great that you’re doing another Ben Shapiro reaction video, that’s what helped me find your channel and I’m sure glad it did!
The current "political candidate/leadership problem" is not exclusively a US problem. It is clear here in the UK that the leadership qualities in our most recent politicians is severely lacking; I find it difficult to see any quality leaders in any of the current members of the house of commons- such that I can't see any of them who 'deserve' to be our Prime Minister.What is needed here is Electoral reform to shake up the stale situation with our two party system.
I would propose that we dump the "house of lords" as an institution and create a second chamber who's membership is based on the total share of the national vote in a general election. Who gets in this situation elected im not sure, someone suggested to me its comes from a list created initially from the highest ranked people who were not elected and then a party preferred list if not all spaces were filled.
However on thing i would like to see is - adding "none of the above" is an option on the ballot in each constituency; and if that option wins , every candidate on that ballot is compulsorily banned from standing for election for 10 years in any constituency. It gives the electorate locally a chance to dispose of the feckless and useless, although its highly unlikely to actually happen; we atleast need an illusion of power and control over these people personally- as the quote goes "governments should be afraid of the people"
You need more parties! To filter out ideological and socioeconomic groups. Its just healthy and a crowbar to go into co-operation. Risk? To much camel swallowing and beuracracy. We in Norway have 9 parties at Storting. Its a nice middle ground. I think the Netherlands have over 20 😂
Bo body supported homosexual union. The Supreme Court decided like abortion to become a legislative body and make it legal terrible decision.
@@odinulveson9101 2-party-system. Like it or not we can’t get out of voting Democrat or Republicans. I’m a democrat and even I know they aren’t perfect. No wonder everyone says don’t talk about politics because we are already on one of there sides. If both of them wanted to do something there’d be no escape from it to happen. I’ve always wanted to see the US having so many parties that people only look at the one who running and not the house they’re in. You guys have the right idea.
It’s called winner takes all and if you disagree move to a different state with policy’s you agree with😂😂, representative representation in voting will never happen and most don’t want it here either💯
Carter also negotiated the hostage crisis' solution, for what it's worth. He didn't have any say in the matter of the release, which was on the day of Reagan's inauguration.
The Algiers Accords, which frees the hostages, were signed on January 19th, 1981, a day before Carter left office. Carter did do it, people just don't know about it
@@thatkristiandude4048I do think people know about it. What the Carter administration is criticized for is the perceived delayed response to the hostage crisis
The Mullahs were afraid of Reagan. They did not want to be holding US hostages with the Gipper manning the wheel. The timing had everything to do with Reagan.
The man stayed up day after day, fighting to get those hostages released, even after he lost the election. Truly admirable.
Carter had been sitting on his thumbs for a year and a half
When I saw the original yesterday and saw that the first two were Carter and Obama and he DIDNT have Andrew Johnson, I knew VTH was gonna have some stuff to say about this list.
Except his bottom two were LBJ and Woodrow Wilson?
@@fingolfinfinwe poor word choice on my part, I meant the first two he talked about
@@micahdavis1369 Ah, got it! Cheers! :)
Thank you for saying that on gay marriage. I'm a proud gay man, and I've always taken the position that if government wasn't involved I wouldn't care, and if a church doesn't recognize my marriage if I eventually do get married, I disagree but think that they have every right to do so. I was raised Roman Catholic, I technically could still be excommunicated just for sleeping with my boyfriend. As long as someone isn't violent towards me or those I care about, they are free to hold whatever beliefs that they have. I know that when I stand before my maker I have sins to answer for, plenty of them, but being gay isn't one of them.
My biggest concern with your critiques on Ben’s list is that you keep using the word “intention”. What is the road to hell paved with? This isn’t a list of people who had the worst or best intentions. It’s a list of the presidents who had the biggest negative impacts for the United States, and that’s based on their policies and influence.
I have trouble watching this guy, as a prelude to every post he promises to limit interjecting comments but repeatedly does. He’s just one of these people with an overstated sense of self-importance who loves the sound of his own voice
I think if you blame Jimmy Carter for bad economy, you can't then not blame George Bush for great recession considering he was the president for ~8 years before that.
Those problems began during the Clinton administration, but yeah, Bush had 8 years to do something about it.
This is gonna be spicyyyyyyy. 😂 Excited to watch this.
VTH, I tend to be pretty centrist in my opinions (perhaps a bit more left-leaning than you) and I really appreciate how you try to be as objective as you can talking about history and reacting to videos like Shapiro’s. I think Shapiro is a perfect example of someone allowing their personal political views to completely cloud their judgment. Thank you for the work you do and the thoughtful insight that you provide. 👍🏽
Vth gets so much wrong tho
“Let their personal political opinions cloud their judgement” buddy that’s how all judgement works, believe it or not, you too do this
@@bigSean2325
He said “completely cloud their judgement”
Anyone who claims they don’t allow their political views to cloud their judgement is a liar.
I agree with the above comment. Ranking presidents will always have a strong subjective element to it. If you support the idea of universal healthcare, you'd surely have a more positive view on Obama than someone who doesn't. If you are in favour of a larger social state and government regulation of business, you'll think Reagan was terrible.
Then again, if you believe in small government and minimal regulation, you'd list Calvin Coolage as one of the best.
"I wouldn't go so far as to say his brain was non functional" caught me off guard
Have been watching you for a while and has really captivated me! Despite being a highschool student from india, your videos have helped me learn a lot about us history, and actually make it fun to watch.
Keep up the good work!
Surprised Shapiro didn't say FDR
He ranked FDR in F tier when he did his presidential tier lists
I put him in my top 10 worst 100% but I was surprised as well. Obama over FDR? It must be the infamy of such a historical war.
@@thatkristiandude4048he said he would’ve ranked fdr in D tier if there was a d tier option
@@bigpoetothegibdo5987he also said LBJ in that video was a D so take it with a grain of salt
@@gamingsquad2326 fair point
Great video VTH. As a liberal I try to keep an open mind when watching Ben Shapiro or any conservative video but some his rankings were appalling. Obama wasn't the best President we had but he was no where near the worst.
No he was terrible
I think doubling our national debt ALONE makes him pretty awful 💀
Yeah Obama was definitely top 10 worst
Ben Shapiro bases a lot of his views on Thomas Sowell principles, and one of the biggest ones is that the effect of policies matters more than the intent. So when you have a Jimmy Carter or LBJ, sure their intentions might not be bad, but the effects are very bad.
Which is a good policy to have. I don't give a damn about Johnson or Carter's intentions, their policies were bad. I elect someone to be president because I want them to do a good job, not because I want him to be a good person
Then he should be absolutely against the likes of Reagan and Bush. But of course that's he likes the same failed policies. So this doesn't track.
@@za-ir5ni Ben doesn't like Bush HW or W.
@@za-ir5niWhich Reagan policy failed exactly??? Would really like an answer to that.
@@za-ir5ni Anyone who thinks Reagan had failed policies that would land him on a bottom 5 list is basically an unapologetic communist
I still can't get over the fact that he pulled a poverty statistic from like 44 years after the Great Society ended.
As if there weren't massive changes in welfare policy in that stretch of time
“He wasn’t a terrible president at all” yes he was lmao. He was awful
Prediction by having seen Ben Sharpiro several times and not seen this video: his list will be full of Democratic Presidents, maybe one or two Republicans as alibi
not even one ... ... next time I'll guess correct
@@TheRobiRobsonRight? Like I was at least expecting Herbert Hoover on the list!
He likely would have if his list was ten. He narrowed it top bottom 5 maybe just for that reason lol. Who would you have swapped out genuine question?
Because the Republican Party of today is very different from its past, most of them weren't as bad as some others
You are incredibly forgiving sir. I wish you were my dad while I was growing up.
I believe both thoughtful conservatives and liberals can find common ground in acknowledging that Jimmy Carter wasn't a particularly effective President, but he's undeniably a great person. He inherited significant challenges and struggled to address them effectively. As for Obama, I've always seen him as a somewhat mediocre President. Shapiro's assertion that Obama is solely responsible for America's troubles is absurd, especially considering his continuation of many of Bush's foreign policies. Obama's tenure was disappointing because he struggled to achieve much, even with a Democrat-controlled Congress, and faced significant gridlock when Republicans gained control. James Buchanan shares similarities with Carter in facing substantial issues without effectively addressing them. Shapiro's dismissal of LBJ's significant achievements is shortsighted, given their historical importance. Wilson was just terrible.
As a southerner I agree with you Woodrow Wilson was a shitty president.
Obama was almost solely responsible for the disintegration of race relations in America. His 2012 campaign essentially lit that fuse, and now we are at a, what, 40-year low in public polling for race relations? His (also shitty) failures abroad don't compare to the domestic failures that have Americans coming apart at the seams.
I always really appreciate the way you disclaim what bias means and what bias you hold going into it. Your disposition is conservative, but you’re not an ideologue, and you use your knowledge to point out nuances here that might be missed or ignored
25:13 that smile across his face when he realizes who’s number one lmaooo
VTH Getting bold!
Here we go guys. Everyone grab some popcorn!
My Low 5 (in no particular order): Andrew Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, Buchanan, Warren Harding and Franklin Pierce... But again: That's just my opinion :)
Pretty good
Warren Harding is really not that bad of a president, corruption is obviously bad but there's actually no real proof that he was personally involved in it and historians have exaggerated the Ohio Gang far out of line to justify him as one of the worst. I think presidents who committed the trail of tears for example, or ordering a massacre is far worse of a sin than a dude in a cabinet taking kickbacks
If you consider Calvin Coolidge to be a good president, there's not a whole lot of reason Warren Harding should be that far back from him
People forget about Pierce. We can't! He was a bastard.
John Tyler, very rarely, was an 'okay' president but was inarguably the country's worst post-presidency.
You forgot Trump 😅
@@unsweetenedit9090 If Trump lived during Civil War era, he would've been worse than Buchanan
He made a lot of good points about Obama. Idk if I'd rank him bottom 5, but bottom 10 is not out of the question. Time will tell.
5:36
I as a young Iranian totally agree with Ben about the way Carter put pressure on the Shah and how he treated the revolutionary forces. Compare this with Nixon's review of the Shah and the Iranian revolution. He had a deep and realistic insight into it (there's a great interview with him). I don't think it would've happened if Carter wasn't at the office.
The Shah was a great man and improved Iran and kept Islamists out.
Polk had the most consequently 4 year presidency, IMHO.
How Andrew Johnson caught zero strays in this video amazes me.
Right? How is he not bottom 5? I have him at number 2 personally
Because he'd have to take off President Obama or President Carter to do that, and people should never forget that Shapiro's goal, first and foremost, is clicks. He knows that outrage generates those sweet, sweet engagement numbers, so he has to start with Presidents people still care about.
@@thatkristiandude4048I think he would give Andrew Johnson 6th worst president based on his tier ranking video.
You and Ben need to get together and discuss topics together.
Good stuff man
“You can’t judge presidents when they’re less than 20 years out of office.”
12:41 “our candidates this election suck.”
Both can be true. Both are true.
@vloggingthroughhistory How can you claim to be objective (and also center right) but state Trump sucks as a candidate? With that in mind, it’s difficult to accept your commentary as unbiased.
I saw this and immediately thought of you, excited to watch!
VERY brave video 😂. Love your videos. You should make your own bottom and top 10/5 presidents!
Buchanan also went around to ensure Taney's decision was the one that was eventually reached. He didn't need to worry. Also, if he's going to attack the poverty rate, picking out one group instead of the United States sounds like a bit of a dog whistle. The rates he discusses affected the United States similarly, yet he specifically points out black single parent homes. Wilson was for liberating as many people as possible, but only if they were Anglo-Saxons. Re-segregating the government destroyed the black middle class that had been growing based off government work.
What are you talking about? Taney made the decision separate from Buchanan and Dred Scott was the correct decision. No one in 1788 thought blacks were citizens.
Wilson wasn't just pro anglo-saxon he wanted self determination for the Irish and slavs and was critical of colonialism. Part of his 14 points was an end to colonialism
@@livingmaze3094 except in Eastern Europe and Asia. He turned down pleas from Ho Chi Min and others who wanted to be free of the French.
Having a two party system is so dumb, like that can't possibly represent everyone, especially in a country with as many people as the U.S.
While true, it (not a hard rule) generally moderates politics in a nation, wheras with a multi-party (3 or more) system incentivizes extremism because coalitions have to placate (by necessity) their extreme wings.
@@kevinwilde3814 There doesn't seem to be moderation if extremism seeps in to one of the two parties, as it has now in the States. The winner-take-all circumstance of a presidency is very dangerous when you have a party that has turned into what the Republicans have.
George Washington warned us about political parties and we ignored him
@@AdventuresWithAjai With all due respect to Washington's legacy and philosophy, he was incredibly short-sighted when it came to the future of American and quite frankly world political systems. Political parties essentially form the basis of virtually all functioning democracies in the world today, for better or worse. Even if you were to somehow have "non-partisan democracies" where political parties are banned, there would still be political factions within the system (i.e. a Parliament or Congress) that would inevitably mutate into de facto political parties.
The parties essentially act as coalitions. Not all Democrats are the same and neither are the Republicans. In countries that have 3+ parties they'll come together to form coalitions to have bigger numbers to pass bills. If the 2 American parties split up they'd still come together as a coalition and essentially be divided as the same 2 sides.
I love the videos I've seen on your channel... It's really nice to see that you try to be as objective as possible. I think not a lot of people try that at the moment :(
"You know, if I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon," Barack Obama not being intentionally divisive. 🤦
Ben's video is 11 minutes long and the reaction [READ: Fact-checking process] is 22 minutes.
It takes twice as long to put it into context.
"He had good intentions there." That does not matter as I am sure every president has good intentions in their own minds, but as the saying goes "the path to hell is paved with good intentions."
I live for these reactions Dowg! 🔥🔥🔥
Your objectivity is so damn refreshing.
I hve just had a thirst to listen to someone with the same viewpoint as me. (Haha not in that way) just in that I value objectivity so highly and can set aside my own personal views to see things from other perspectives. I can even argue as devils advocate for issues that I personally disagree with.
I also feel the same way about party politics and consider myself center right overall although a bit more liberal on social issues.
It’s so hard to find objectivity online so I end up finding myself having to consume content from both ideas of the spectrum so that I can find the real truth myself somewhere in the middle.
I know this is history commentary but still just having a new channel I watch that subscribes to the same value of objectivity is truly a breathe of fresh air. And certain diamond in the rough within the context of RUclips and online commentary. Even things that hve nothing to do with politics people just can’t help injecting partisan spins wherever they can.
So just being able to hear your opinions on things based just on the facts and not emotion and tribalist leanings (I think this is my 3rd time saying how nice it is lol) is just such a welcome addition to my RUclips learning rotation.
Ben hating Jimmy Carter's presidency isn't a surprise
It's him hating Carter's post-presidency that is
I lived through the Jimmy Carter era. It was bad. I remember being at a bank and overheard the loan officer say to a lady "Aren't you glad you got that mortgage at 17%?" Think about that. 17% interest on a mortgage. Peaked out at around 18.5%.
That’s crazy!! I think it definitely was a carry over from the previous administration as well.
Calling Shapiro an “extreme right-wing conservative” is like calling mayonnaise “extremely spicy”
He is pretty far right my man. You have to understand, nearly all conservative media, TODAY, is extreme right. You don't find many good faith commentators on either side, but the right side is absolutely off the rails. You no longer have people like Wallace, Shepard Smith, and the like, who legitimately told the news and didn't let their extreme biases affect everything they say. Shapiro doesn't say much that makes any kind of sense
No he really isn't
@@seanspreckelsen3496 Agreed, I think Ben is perceived as moderate because he is viewed as a conservative intellectual and someone who is open to reason - but he basically supports everything the modern republican party does which is quite far right at this point in time
1. Franklin Pierce - Passed the Kansas/Nebraska Act and greatly increased the risks of a Civil War.
2. Andrew Johnson - His actions restricted reconstruction and paved the way for Jim Crow.
3. James Buchanan - His inactions caused the Civil War relations to get dramatically worse.
4. Woodrow Wilson - created the IRS, federal income tax, and the Fed. The most authoritarian president in U.S. history, with the worst monetary policies.
5. Warren Harding - An interventionist who was corrupt to the core.
Worst post-president: John Tyler, but might make some people's top 5 best. That's... unique.
Dishonorable mention: FDR is one of my personal top 10 worsts.
1. Pierce had nothing to do with Kansas Nebraska
2. That is a good thing. Reconstruction was unconstitutional. Also Jim Crow existed in the north
3. Again that is constitutional
4. Fair
5. Harding was not interventionist and was not corrupt
@@livingmaze3094 1. Pierce signed the KNA into law.
2. Providing liberties and adding unto the constitution couldn't be more constitutional.
3. Buchanan still failed as a leader to prevent the Civil War, which was unconstitutional.
4. To add to the fact that Wilson was a racist POS, the fact that he brought us into WW1 at the last minute was one of the worst presidential efforts. Ever.
5. Harding was known for his scandals.
@@HaveButOneLife 1. Because he had to
2. Reconstruction was just outright illegal and corrupt
3. what was he suppose to do? And no secession wasn’t unconstitutional
4. Wilson didn’t join WWI last minute. He fought tooth and nail to avoid the war but germany forced their hand with the Zimmerman telegram
5. Harding wasn’t corrupt
@@livingmaze3094do research about the teapot dome. Harding is considered one of the most corrupt presidents of all time. He never wanted to be president and wishes he never became president.
Were you in some coma during 2020-2021?
Love watching your channel. I'm someone who identified as somewhat of a centrist historically, but am now finding myself aligning a bit more with center-left (without necessarily changing a lot of my beliefs). This channel often times gives me a lot of great insight & I love that you tackle it relatively objectively while simultaneously also calling out when you may be biased.
The sheer fact that I can watch your channel, hear that you state you're a conservative ahead of time, and still see that you place Obama in the mid-20s of president is reflective of the value you place on objectivity. Totally appreciate the content and I'm excited to subscribe.
The " Facts don't care about your feelings" Guy sure got emotional when he was talking about Obama. It's almost like Obama did a lot of work to help out a community that Bennie Boy and his Daily Wire buddies have made an entire career out of hating.