Who is the best leader your country never had?

[Barrister]

No idea. I mean sure there have been a couple elections where I felt the country got it wrong, 1992 and 2000 stick out, but I don't know if any of those really fill me with angst.

I mean Dewey and Stevenson were great in their other public contributions but I don't know if they really would have been great Presidents.

I dunno - do you really think that you'd be better off with President Al Gore?

[Valmy]

No idea. I mean sure there have been a couple elections where I felt the country got it wrong, 1992 and 2000 stick out, but I don't know if any of those really fill me with angst.

I mean Dewey and Stevenson were great in their other public contributions but I don't know if they really would have been great Presidents.

I dunno - do you really think that you'd be better off with President Al Gore?

Yes. But as I said I don't think we missed some great leader there. I was more taken with Lieberman than I was with Gore to be honest. I was disappointed but not nearly as disappointed as I was in 1992. I truly thought we were fucked.

[celedhring]

Hey are you guys listening the Mike Duncan's Latin American Revolution series? I loved the line that Bolivar was the only one to not support Ferdinand in Venezuela during Ferdinand's captivity in the Napoleonic Wars because he was the only one who had actually met Ferdinand.

Still going through the French Revolution. Actually just listened to the one dealing with the Battle of Valmy today. 

Fernando VII was the terriblest Spanish king, but it probably wasn't politically feasible to change dynasty or go with a Republic at the time. There's always the "meh, we should have let the French win" debate.

[derspiess]

Goldwater.

[Valmy]

Ferdinand could have been bullied into accepting the Constitution of 1812 though.

[Barrister]

Goldwater.

Would have been very interesting to see how he'd have dealt with all the social unrest of the late 1960s, but everything I've read about him he seemed like a very honourable man.

[Valmy]

Goldwater.

Would have been very interesting to see how he'd have dealt with all the social unrest of the late 1960s, but everything I've read about him he seemed like a very honourable man.

The anti-Civil Rights stuff makes me think he probably was the wrong man for the times. But hey at least no little girls were nuked

[Eddie Teach]

Stephen Douglas /ducks

[Siege]

Goldwater.

He would have never won because Kennedy had just been offed and the people's sympathy was with the democrats.

The only thing we got was that excellent speech by Ronald Reagan. A time of choosing.

[Valmy]

He would have never won because Kennedy had just been offed and the people's sympathy was with the democrats.

You think? Though come to think of it having a President shot has done the party in question some political good election-wise for awhile. Well except for Garfield.

[Valmy]

Stephen Douglas /ducks

His inspirational leadership passing the suicide pact known as the Compromise of 1850 was pretty awesome.

[celedhring]

Ferdinand could have been bullied into accepting the Constitution of 1812 though.

Not really, the liberals had little factual power at the time. Such a pity, Spain's biggest historical missed opportunity.

The second biggest was when a few years later the liberals *did* have enough power to reinstate the 1812 Constitution and we got invaded by France to restore absolutist power. Thanks for that.

[dps]

McCain in 2000.

You bring a whole other dimension to the discussion when you include people who ran in the primaries but didn't get the nomination.  I'll stick to just the general election results.

It's a tougher question than I originally thought, given the qualifiers put on it.   I think the election in my lifetime we most clearly got "wrong" was 1992, but since Bush the Elder had already been President, it doesn't count for purposes of this thread.  Oddly, most of the other elections that sprang to my mind have a similar problem--1912, 1888, 1840, 1800 (1840 might not be in the running if Harrison hadn't died, leaving us with Tyler).

Otherwise--hmm.  I'm inclined to think that Goldwater would have been a better President that Johnson, but I'm not certain of that.  Dewy I think would have been a good President, but I have a hard time seeing him as being better than Truman.  McCain?  I don't know;  I've never been a McCain fan, and except for Obamacare, Obama hasn't been nearly as bad as I feared he would be (granting that that's a big "except").  All things considered, I think I'd go with James Cox.  I know next to nothing about him or his policies, but it's hard to see how he'd not have been better than Harding.

[CountDeMoney]

[DGuller]

No idea. I mean sure there have been a couple elections where I felt the country got it wrong, 1992 and 2000 stick out, but I don't know if any of those really fill me with angst.

I mean Dewey and Stevenson were great in their other public contributions but I don't know if they really would have been great Presidents.

I dunno - do you really think that you'd be better off with President Al Gore?

How can that even be a question?  You don't have to be that good to be better than a man who committed the worst geopolitical blunder in the country's history.