Poll: Who do you chose?

[The Midnight Ride]

I had an interesting question posed to me by a co-worker.

Out of the last five Presidents (Obama/Bush II/Clinton/Bush I/Reagan), who would you feel reached the closest to your ideal from of government based on the end results, not rhetoric? Obviously, I know many of you will say that none of these would be even close to your positions (I would be one) but nonetheless it makes for an interesting topic. Based on some of the Best/Worst Presidents lists I found through search, I suspect it will come down to Clinton and Reagan although both have substantial baggage.

Hope this is of interest to some of you!

[pcosmar]

I had an interesting question posed to me by a co-worker.

Out of the last five Presidents (Obama/Bush II/Clinton/Bush I/Reagan), who would you feel reached the closest to your ideal from of government based on the end results, not rhetoric? Obviously, I know many of you will say that none of these would be even close to your positions (I would be one) but nonetheless it makes for an interesting topic. Based on some of the Best/Worst Presidents lists I found through search, I suspect it will come down to Clinton and Reagan although both have substantial baggage.

Hope this is of interest to some of you!

None of the above. not a poll option.

[Kludge]

They're so far away, choosing one would be meaningless.

[-C-]

This is like "chose which ex-wife is your favorite."

[eduardo89]

This is like "chose which ex-wife is you're favorite."

That's a game newt could play.

[pcosmar]

New Poll.
Would you rather die by,,
A being slow roasted over a fire.
B skinned alive till you bleed out
C tied down and eaten by Army Ants

[eduardo89]

New Poll.
Would you rather die by,,
A being slow roasted over a fire.
B skinned alive till you bleed out
C tied down and eaten by Army Ants

Question: for A do in get the option of being marinated beforehand?

[DamianTV]

None of the above. not a poll option.

+Rep

Did not vote. There was no "None of the Above" option, and not a single one of them represents the will of the people. Clinton deregulated the Banks. Both Bush's are Oil Tycoons. Obama is a flat out Socialist who speaks volumes by remaining silent about the Police Brutality committed against all of us daily, among other things.

[AuH20]

Reagan in a runaway and he was plagued by a democratic congress he made "deals" with. And remember that historically the accomplishments of the Reagan's administration aren't anything to flaunt, but he's been the best of the group. The last 4 have been atrocious, which is putting it mildly.

[TomL]

I agree with the majority so far. None of the above is the appropriate answer for me. We were duped by Ronald Reagan. He was no conservative. He ran on a platform of eliminating the DOE. Instead, he made it stronger. His Secretary of Transportation, Elizabeth Dole, arm-twisted the states to pass certain legislation, including seat belt laws. The Reagan Administration cared as much about the Constitution as the Obama Administration, in my opinion. We were duped then, and many Republicans have been duped ever since.

[Echoes]

In his younger years Reagan sounded an awful lot like Ron Paul, in this vid you'd think they were twins. Too bad he never lived up to his rhetoric.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmsP95Bl9pM&list=PL259A246153032009&index= 10&feature=plpp_video

[Liberty74]

None of them! :p

[BuddyRey]

For all of his many faults, Clinton at least never made me feel ashamed to be an American. And the '90s surplus sure was nice.

[DamianTV]

Lest you forget that Clinton had his hand in Deregulating the Banks? When that happened, people started spending more because the restrictions on Banks Lending Practices had been all but removed. The long term consequences of his actions are exactly what we are seeing today. Do you still not feel ashamed?

[AuH20]

For all of his many faults, Clinton at least never made me feel ashamed to be an American. And the '90s surplus sure was nice.

When he wasn't killing Ron Brown, trading technology to the Chinese for campaign funding or authorizing the Waco and Ruby Ridge fiascos, he was great. Clinton has always been a ruthless sociopath and it goes back to his days as governor of Arkansas.

[Pericles]

For all of his many faults, Clinton at least never made me feel ashamed to be an American. And the '90s surplus sure was nice.

Question no one seems to be able to answer. If Clinton ran budget surpluses, why did the national debt increase every year. In years with a surplus shouldn't the debt go down?





09/30/2003
6,783,231,062,743.62


09/30/2002
6,228,235,965,597.16


09/30/2001
5,807,463,412,200.06


09/30/2000
5,674,178,209,886.86


09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43




09/30/1998
5,526,193,008,897.62



09/30/1997
5,413,146,011,397.34


09/30/1996
5,224,810,939,135.73


09/29/1995
4,973,982,900,709.39


09/30/1994
4,692,749,910,013.32


09/30/1993
4,411,488,883,139.38


09/30/1992
4,064,620,655,521.66


09/30/1991
3,665,303,351,697.03


09/28/1990
3,233,313,451,777.25


09/29/1989
2,857,430,960,187.32


09/30/1988
2,602,337,712,041.16


09/30/1987
2,350,276,890,953.00


09/30/1986
2,125,302,616,658.42

[AuH20]

Question no one seems to be able to answer. If Clinton ran budget surpluses, why did the national debt increase every year. In years with a surplus shouldn't the debt go down?





09/30/2003
6,783,231,062,743.62


09/30/2002
6,228,235,965,597.16


09/30/2001
5,807,463,412,200.06


09/30/2000
5,674,178,209,886.86


09/30/1999 5,656,270,901,615.43




09/30/1998
5,526,193,008,897.62



09/30/1997
5,413,146,011,397.34


09/30/1996
5,224,810,939,135.73


09/29/1995
4,973,982,900,709.39


09/30/1994
4,692,749,910,013.32


09/30/1993
4,411,488,883,139.38


09/30/1992
4,064,620,655,521.66


09/30/1991
3,665,303,351,697.03


09/28/1990
3,233,313,451,777.25


09/29/1989
2,857,430,960,187.32


09/30/1988
2,602,337,712,041.16


09/30/1987
2,350,276,890,953.00


09/30/1986
2,125,302,616,658.42



I think he was using an accounting trick with excess S.S. revenue. Granted, he didn't spend as much as other presidents but.....

http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16


Interestingly, this most likely was not even a conscious decision by Clinton. The Social Security Administration is legally required to take all its surpluses and buy U.S. Government securities, and the U.S. Government readily sells those securities--which automatically and immediately becomes intragovernmental holdings. The economy was doing well due to the dot-com bubble and people were earning a lot of money and paying a lot into Social Security. Since Social Security had more money coming in than it had to pay in benefits to retired persons, all that extra money was immediately used to buy U.S. Government securities. The government was still running deficits, but since there was so much money coming from excess Social Security contributions there was no need to borrow more money directly from the public. As such, the public debt went down while intragovernmental holdings continued to skyrocket.

The net effect was that the national debt most definitely did not get paid down because we did not have a surplus. The government just covered its deficit by borrowing money from Social Security rather than the public.

the harsh truth of this "shuffling" ploy:

As I explained in a previous article, Social Security is legally required to use all its surpluses to buy U.S. Government securities. From Social Security's standpoint, it has a multi-trillion dollar reserve in the form of U.S. Government securities. When the Social Security system starts to falter due to insufficient contributions to pay for all the benefits of retiring baby-boomers, probably around 2017, it will start cashing those securities and will expect the U.S. Government to pay it back, with interest. The problem is, the government doesn't have the money. The money has already been spent--in part, effectively, to pay down the public debt under Clinton.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5656

[Pericles]

I think he was using an accounting trick with excess S.S. revenue. Granted, he didn't spend as much as other presidents but.....

http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16



the harsh truth of this "shuffling" ploy:


http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5656

Exactly my point. Clinton's surplus was as phony as the man himself. They had the opportunity to refinance a load of the debt long term and save the public some interest payments over time, but went for suspending sales of the 30 year bond instead, in order to reduce current interest payments and make the deficit look smaller than it really was.

[Lothario]

None of the above. not a poll option.

This.

[ryanmkeisling]

None of the above. not a poll option.

This^^^ There isn't a president in recent history that wasn't a corrupt crook.

[John F Kennedy III]

None of the above so....

I choose you PIKACHU!

[Uriah]

I usually like to partake in polls but I choose none of the above.

[eduardo89]

None of the above so....

I choose you PIKACHU!

Herman Cain already beat you to it.