Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Frank Underwood.

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    F.D.R.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Well I must be an idiot then.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Abraham Lincoln.
    • Community Assistant
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Welcome Squad
    Martin van Buren. Why? Because his first language wasn't English and that's pretty cool.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Can't agree with Eisenhower from a British perspective. His actions at Suez were unforgivable.
    ^^ and Vietnam
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    "George W. Bush was the best president ever!" - said absolutely noone ...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Can't agree with Eisenhower from a British perspective. His actions at Suez were unforgivable.
    Agreed.

    Poor Eden
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Cato the Elder)
    Agreed.

    Poor Eden
    Eden to be fair was pitiful for submitting to the US albeit a UK-France conflict with the US would not have been a good thing.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I would say in the following order:

    1. Reagan (won the Cold War and restored American pride)
    2. Theodore Roosevelt (the epitome of the lost values of manliness, courage and independence, war hero)
    3. Andrew Jackson (won swathes of land for the republic by slaughtering thousands of Indians and was the only American President to pay off the national debt, as well as being a war hero)

    I would prefer to put the best President America never had, Barry Goldwater, at the top, but sadly I can't

    I'm tempted to put Clinton fourth...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Eden to be fair was pitiful for submitting to the US albeit a UK-France conflict with the US would not have been a good thing.
    I never understood why the USA was so horny about destroying the European colonial empires for the sake of an entirely constructed, mythical self-image of an "anti-imperialist" republic, thereby damaging themselves in the long-term by throwing the vast majority of the newly independent states into the Soviet camp.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Cato the Elder)
    I never understood why the USA was so horny about destroying the European colonial empires for the sake of an entirely constructed, mythical self-image of an "anti-imperialist" republic, thereby damaging themselves in the long-term by throwing the vast majority of the newly independent states into the Soviet camp.
    Because WW2 was not the norm for British-American relations. We'd been taking potshots at each other over the Canadian border for most of the 1800's. The British Empire would have been a threat to the US once the USSR was out the way.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    andrew jackson - the only president in US history to balance the budget - what a hero

    special mentions:
    lincoln: freer of slaves, technically speaking
    reagan: winners of cold wars, technically speaking
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    andrew jackson - the only president in US history to balance the budget - what a hero

    special mentions:
    lincoln: freer of slaves, technically speaking
    reagan: winners of cold wars, technically speaking
    Lincoln doesn't really deserve credit for that, he didn't really care about the slaves and his wife's family owned slaves. He was more motivated in saving the Union than freeing the slaves. He was also partly motivated by support for abolitionism and statism.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cato the Elder)
    Lincoln doesn't really deserve credit for that, he didn't really care about the slaves and his wife's family owned slaves. He was more motivated in saving the Union than freeing the slaves. He was also partly motivated by support for abolitionism and statism.
    take a wild guess why I put "technically speaking" after my description of him
    and yes, I don't think reagan can really be said to have "won the cold war" with russia being a crumbling empire that used a failed economic system
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Barraco Barner.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cato the Elder)
    Lincoln doesn't really deserve credit for that, he didn't really care about the slaves and his wife's family owned slaves. He was more motivated in saving the Union than freeing the slaves. He was also partly motivated by support for abolitionism and statism.
    Meh, this is a difficult area, but I think it's an exaggeration to say Lincoln didn't care about slavery. He had, for many years, expressed his moral opposition to slavery and his desire for abolition. He was, by a long way, the most clearly anti-slavery President ever to have been elected at the time, and that's partly why the South seceded.

    It is true that Lincoln wasn't an abolitionist. He believed there were higher priorities which justified temporarily permitting slavery (such as the Union) to continue. That said, he jumped at the chance to turn the Civil War into a war against slavery.

    His position does seem quite bizarre to a modern observer at first sight, but I think once you can understand his pragmatism and political maneuvering, it does make sense and is clearly (though far from vehemently) anti-slavery.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Can't agree with Eisenhower from a British perspective. His actions at Suez were unforgivable.
    Naww.... :console:

    You were born a 100 yrs to late and not the aristocracy or of the monied class.

    Playing by your own stupid imperialist rules America wupped Britain good. Why the hell should America care about the British perspective :lol:
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Naww.... :console:

    You were born a 100 yrs to late and not the aristocracy or of the monied class.

    Playing by your own stupid imperialist rules America wupped Britain good. Why the hell should America care about the British perspective :lol:
    Indeed. I'd have made a very good Liberal Party PM before 1914 when they lost their way. Bit of imperialism, eugenics but also free trade and a bit of social liberalism.

    True although i don't think many over there rave about him.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    LBJ for the civil rights
    FDR for New Deal

    #gcsehistoryOCR
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.