Curious George vs. Tricky Dick: Who's the Better President?

I think it's a bad comparison as Nixon was of the Country Club Republican background while Bush is of the Goldwater/Reagan Revolution Republican background. There is a great deal of difference between the two strains of Republicanism and don't think it all that easy to compare the two.

 

Other than a preoccupation with foreign wars (and a belief that the best defense is sometimes a good offense), I don't see a whole lot of similarities.

Nixon was not a believer in the power of the free market. As a matter of fact, Nixon did some very un-free-market things. Tax cuts were not an issue during Nixon's tenure, to my knowledge. Certainly not the centerpiece of his domestic agenda. Nixon's paranoia ended up taking him on many personal vendettas. Nixon did believe that personal diplomacy had some merit. Mr. Bush has not shown that side, to my satisfaction (The Bush Administration seems to have adopted a 'my way or the highway' approach to foreign affairs. Other than Southeast Asia where Nixon escalated the War, a War he inherited rather than started, Nixon allowed for other approaches, including the trip to China).

That's off the top of my head.

I just don't see how they are alike other than both having been Presidents with "Republican" attached to their names. Any more than I would be able to really compare Reagan with Lincoln.

 

I'm just saying that Nixon wasn't really a Republican by the current sense of the word. So, it's no more valid a comparison than comparing Bush to JFK.

But hey, I'm sure the President wouldn't mind being compared to Nixon, especially if it meant a re-election showing like Nixon had in 1972.

 

What? No attribution??

1. I was a young adult during the Nixon Presidency and it should be an easy question for me to answer, that Nixon was a worse President. After all, he destroyed what respect was left for the office when he was found to have lied about Watergate and tried to cover it up. He had the Enemies List. He said he would get us out of Vietnam and took years and hundreds of thousands of lives to do it. He quit before he was thrown out of office. But right now, I'm leaning towards Bush being the worse of the two.

2. Bush is farther to the right. As an example, look at Nixon's Supreme Court appointments. Chief Justice Warren Burger, nominated in 1969, wrote opinions that legally defined obscenity, established busing as a tool to end segregation and forced President Nixon to release the Watergate tapes. Justice Harry Blackmun, nominated by Nixon, wrote Roe v. Wade. Justice Lewis Powell, Nixon's other Justice, was a moderate, voting for Roe v. Wade and affirmative action, but without quotas.

Nixon had 2 nominations rejected, with good reason. One of them, Harold Carswell, was so "worthy" that a Senator Mundt asked "what's wrong with appointing a mediocre person to the Court?" So maybe the court wasn't as conservative as Nixon wanted, and he did get in Renquist, but it was Reagan who made him Chief Justice. I'm sure someone like MadMax could say much more about Nixon's appointments, but there is no doubt that the result was a more moderate court than the current one, with rulings that were for some forms of affirmative action and limits to Presidential power (the Watergate tapes, the Pentagon Papers).

Bush hasn't had his chance yet with the Supreme Court. I hope he doesn't get one.



Man, I just looked at the time. I'll have to carry on tomorrow, hopefully, if I can. Good grief, someone could write a book about this. And should.

 

This is really one of the dumber threads I have seen. Instead of telling us to explain the differrence in 2 presidents from 2 differrent eras, seperated by 3 decades, Why don't you tell us the similarities besides republican? A better comparison would be Clinton and Nixon since they do have things in common like the Only 2 to be impeached, and the Whitewater, Watergate scandals.

 

Stupid thread.

Which is the better President?

That's like saying who is a better murderer...Andrea Yates or Susan Smith?

"Well, one drowned her kids in the bathtub while the other one drove her car into a lake with the kids strapped inside".



Stupid, stupid thread.

 

Nixon was never impeached, he resigned before that happened. Clinton was, but wasn't "charged" with anything....

 

I thought Impeachment was the "charge". The other half is the removal from office, which didn't happen.

(And the other guy who was impeached but not removed from office was Andrew Johnson).

 

you think Nixon was futher right than Reagan? i haven't heard these coparisons you speak of, but I'm assuming it's some attempt to draw a parallel between Watergate and some "scandal" in the Bush admin? can you elaborate?

 

You are absolutely right--I misspoke, "convicted" not charged...

 

I'd vote for Nixon every day of the week. Nixon was a scary guy, but arguably the last liberal president in American history. Go figure.

Nixon created more regulatory agencies than any other president since FDR -- including the Environmental Protection Agency.

He oversaw the expansion of Social Security and the creation of Supplemental Security Income for the disabled. Hell, he was in favor of a guaranteed income level for all working Americans. Compared to the six presidents who followed, Nixon was practically a socialist.

 

Very interesting.

I should read a Nixon biography one day.

Funny how our perceptions are often at odds with the realities.

 

This thread is one of those that wants to "spark discussion" sorta like my thread about asking the question, can Democrats be Christian?

 

Bush, though if the timeframess were reversed, I'd really consider Nixon... I just think we are more susceptible to abuse of our democratic foundations today because of technology, the changes in the economy, and the state of the world. That, and there were a few folks with integrity on both sides of the aisle that stood up to the abuse back then. One thing in Nixon's favor is that he appeared to be a practitioner of Realpolitik and I'm guessing he would not have gone into Iraq, at least in the way Bush did.

Domestically I don't see much difference. Nixon started the Southern Strategy and would have exploited it more ruthlessly than Bush. Nixon set up a good chunk of the contractor government and would have been as egregious as Bush has been on that front. I'm sure Nixon would have pursued a similar strategy of 9-11 exploitation, as he was the original get-tough-on-crime/commies guy back in the day. However, I don't think he was as ideologically pure as Bush and he was capable of making his own decisions.

In reference to GV's post , he had little choice in regards to EPA and such as there was a active Dem majority in Congress and he had to horsetrade, though the price controlas are an interesting study and not something I can envision either party doing today.

The good thing about Bush is that he is not near the politician Nixon was and will have a much harder time with reelection.

 

Another interesting question I've seen bandied about recently is "What would have happened over the last 35 years if MLK, Jr. and Bobby Kennedy had not been shot?"

 

MacBeth, those were all good questions, but I'd suggest next time limiting their number or just having one, general thought for discussion and seeing what happens. I started responding and realized I was wading through so much that I couldn't begin to express it. My typing skills consist of the two fingered variety.

I think there are valid comparisons between the two and, in many ways, Bush is more dangerous. He has a majority in Congress. He has a far more developed media manipulation team. He is not nearly as intelligent as Nixon and is the "puppet", in my opinion, of several of his advisors and "friends". Nixon most definitely not anyone's puppet. He ran the show.