Carter says...

LDB · Apr 25, 2012

The second worst president in the history of the nation is ok with the worst president in the history of the nation being defeated in November.

Carter: I Wouldn't Mind Romney in White House

davekc · Apr 25, 2012

Based on what we have now, I can see him saying that.

muttly · Apr 25, 2012

It's probably a ploy by Carter using reverse psychology.

He probably said it so people would say "Egads Carter wants Romney so maybe we should stick with Barry"

Ragman · Apr 25, 2012

LDB said:
The second worst president in the history of the nation . . .

.....

Tennesseahawk · Apr 25, 2012

#1

Close 2nd:

And so you can't call me biased:

Pilgrim · Apr 25, 2012

Everybody forgets about Wilson because his presidency was so long ago - but you're right, he should be right up there near the top.
Johnson should definitely rank right up there as one of the worst, considering how he pushed us ever deeper into the Vietnam mess and his Great Society programs that continue to bleed our economy and culture today. But Johnson was a skilled politician and everything he did was planned and intentional.
I don't think any of them can top Obama and Carter for sheer incompetence.

Tennesseahawk · Apr 26, 2012

I'm talking damage they did to the country. Obama is up there. But it'll be years before the extent of his damage is truly felt.

FDR, Carter, Nixon, Bush Jr... all incompetent boobs. All fed us to the elitists, and their gradual takeover. And I expect Obama will end up in the top 5.

Ragman · Apr 26, 2012

Tennesseahawk said:
I'm talking damage they did to the country. Obama is up there. But it'll be years before the extent of his damage is truly felt.

FDR, Carter, Nixon, Bush Jr... all incompetent boobs. All fed us to the elitists, and their gradual takeover. And I expect Obama will end up in the top 5.

Ok fine, I'll agree to this.

Dynamite 1 · Apr 27, 2012

see, thats the answer hit on the head. we never feel the full effect of what one presidency has done till after it has been replaced. also, we could have a candidate that everyone simply loves, but after being elected some will hate. there is no winning. even a candidate with the best intentions will not be able to fulfill their plans because they have to deal with the rest of government.

layoutshooter · Apr 27, 2012

Dynamite 1 said:
see, thats the answer hit on the head. we never feel the full effect of what one presidency has done till after it has been replaced. also, we could have a candidate that everyone simply loves, but after being elected some will hate. there is no winning. even a candidate with the best intentions will not be able to fulfill their plans because they have to deal with the rest of government.

There has not been a viable candidate with 'good intentions' in my voting lifetime. Most likely not in my lifetime in general and long before. The only 'intention' of government is more power for themselves at the expense of the People.

RLENT · Apr 27, 2012

muttly said:
It's probably a ploy by Carter using reverse psychology.

Nah .... he really means it (and for good reasons) .... but it certainly does tell one a whole lot about the general state of the GOP as a party, when ya have Carter of all people endorsing the (so-called) "presumptive nominee" ....

Heheheh .... ya just absolutely gotta love it ....

layoutshooter · Apr 27, 2012

RLENT said:
Nah .... he really means it (and for good reasons) .... but it certainly does tell one a whole lot about the general state of the GOP as a party, when ya have Carter of all people endorsing the (so-called) "presumptive nominee" ....

Heheheh .... ya just absolutely gotta love it ....

Or throw up.

RLENT · Apr 27, 2012

layoutshooter said:
There has not been a viable candidate with 'good intentions' in my voting lifetime. Most likely not in my lifetime in general and long before.

Mongolia for the Mongolians !!!