Best/Worst Presidents for Ability to Compromise

[jnewt]

8 hours ago, lm1145 said:

Did people assault police? Yes. Should they be charged with crimes for that? Yes. Did the police mercilessly beat protesters? Yes. I'm not for police brutality.

Were windows busted? I'm sure they were. Should those people be charged? Yes. Did the people desecrate "the people's house" as you call it? I'm not sure what that means. If it means vandalism, then yes I'm sure they did. Should they be charged? Yes, although you called it the people's house, so I'm not sure if vandalizing your own house is a crime but vandalizing a building belonging to the government of the United States is and should be. Anyone who threatened to harm or kill a vice president, a member of congress or anyone else should be charged. That behavior and rhetoric is disgusting. Was democracy wiped out? Not quite. Was it close to happening? Not quite. Was it an insurrection? In my opinion, not quite. 

Asking (and answering) ten rhetorical questions in a row is P*tine level annoying discourse

[Edouard]

So this is a coup

But this isn't an attempted coup

As a french this is it for me

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6_February_1934_crisis

[vcczar]

The only reason LBJ is definitely on this top 12 list is that much of his major legislation had more support from  northeastern Republicans than Southern Democrats. It is almost unavoidable that he wouldn't be on the top list. 

Monroe is kind of questionably on the list. There was basically only one party. Federalists were so few that they were routinely ignored. I think he makes this list primarily for having adopted Federalists policies once the party was no longer a threat. This Neo-Federalism within the Jeffersonian Party actually begins with Jefferson, but it accelerates with Madison after the War of 1812. 

[Cenzonico]

13 hours ago, jnewt said:

P*tine

He who should not be named. 

[Edouard]

22 minutes ago, Cenzonico said:

He who should not be named.