This is making the rounds in the history section of twitter, didn't realize so many were following this and disgusted by it.
It shows Democratic talking points given to the media, and the link above the media following it exactly.
How are we supposed to operate as a Democracy without free media? Democrats already lost the right to vote in their primaries. Now they lack a free media.
I was forced to block a member here after it occured to me he never once told the truth about politics. He wasn't expressing opinions or his views, he was stating facts of what happened, and it never happened. And it was over and over again.
I suppose historians by default have a higher threshold for the truth. We don't accept lies because they are more convenient to our ideology. Well, there is a ideological subsection of history that does this, but it js usually quite easy to spot and dismiss them.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Historians, who "by default have a higher threshold for the truth", recently rated Trump 45th out of our 45 presidents. It is clear that he should never be elected by the Electoral College again given his abysmal performance the first time.
@windinhishair No, historians tend to rate James Buchanan as the worst. Trump doesn't even show up on that kist, nor any recent president from any party. You are outright lying.
@Dignaga You need to read the recent New York Times 2024 poll of historians that scored and ranked all the presidents. Trump was dead last, and his score was almost 50% lower than the next worst president. If you are unable to do your own research, I can help you with it.
Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, and Franklin Pierce usually make the bottom five in these polls. Now Trump has joined them for eternity.
@windinhishair No, I don't have to read it. It's patently false, either you lied or the NYTs lied, but most likely you, as the NYTs knows people are aware the 19th century produced some terrible Presidents. Stop lying or you'll be blocked.
Didn't you say that "historians have a higher threshold for the truth"? Were you lying when you said that? The NYT did not do the rankings. Historians did. It was first reported in the LA Times.
You of course are free to block me. It is a free country. Most Trump apologists and Cultists do once I prove they are lying and are humiliated. They just can't handle the truth.
@windinhishair First off, the New York Times Article leads to a one page PDF, and it doesn't say crap on jt other than a poll was conducted by two political science professors.
Neither of their personal pages even acknowledge the poll, I had to search for several minutes for the paper, and the methodology doesn't state it targeted HISTORIANS, but rather 525 scholars from various unnamed academic fields, and they only got replies back from 191. Most of the scholars didn't give a damn about the poll, and we don't know the academic standing of those who did.
It literally could of been all associate professors of liberal arts, or a artist doing clay sculptures at a art school. You don't even need to be a professor or a associate professor to be considered a university scholar, I know guys (stupid enough) to spend 7 years on a bachelors degree in philosophy, spending the last few years taking out loan after load, doing papers.
The results of the poll show a large shift in near past democratic presidents rising in the ranks, including Bill Clinton who did really nothing during his presidency. He shouldn't pass the middle hurdle of presidents. A uneventful presidency shouod be ranked exactly that.
Given most people rejected this poll, and given we don't know the qualifications of those who took it, and given the unbelievable party bias it had, we should reject it on the grounds of scientific scepticism. The sort of stuff they should of taught you in school.
Learn critical thinking skills, and check your sources. I will be going theough the data, try not to look like a fool again.
@Dignaga You deliberately left out the part where Republican historians also rated Trump very low. But that should be evident from the score--you can't score that low and be rated very highly by Republicans, Democrats, or Independents. You posit a party bias solely because you dislike the results. You couldn't be less scientific or more wrong. Even a cursory review would have revealed the following and saved you from the rambling, uneducated text you posted:
Known as the 2024 Presidential Greatness Project Expert Survey, the study was conducted by a group of leading experts specializing in the American presidency — including the current and recent members of the Presidents and Executive Politics Section of the American Political Science Association.
You would also find, if you were able to concentrate for several minutes, that there were partisan differences in the rankings, with Democrats rating Obama and Biden higher, and Republicans rating them lower. The results reflect an average somewhere in the middle. If you had ever followed these kinds of rankings for any length of time, you would see (or maybe not) that recent presidents tend to be ranked higher over time after they leave office. That's precisely what has happened to George W. Bush, who has risen in these polls since his presidency was completed. Of course, having a Trump to compare him to would automatically make him look better in comparison.
Your inability to find information and to critically review and interpret it is evident in your posts. I have no doubt your hyperpartisan "analysis" will continue. I will continue to correct your lies as you make them and help to educate you. If I were you, I would quit while you are behind. You just keep showing your ignorance and looking dumber and dumber with each post.
@Dignaga You got caught lying, and your feeble attempts to recover are laughable. If you knew anything about presidential surveys, you would know the results are very similar to previous rankings. You just dislike the results and can’t deal with them. The NYT didn’t do the rankings, so blaming them for your intense dislike is ludicrous. It isn’t any different from blaming them for someone’s murder because they reported on it. You continue to demonstrate a lack of cognitive skills. The mindless political troll is you, and everyone can plainly see it. They are laughing at you.
@windinhishair It is typical of me to debunk bad polls. I told the truth, you failed to debunk my claims. I can post images of the scientific polling, but I suspect you'll claim you or blind or illiterate.
I'm highly trained in debate, used to be a member of just about every philosophy group in San Francisco, debated professors from University of California, Davis and won, I'm not remotely confused and intimidated.
You know why I keep pointing out you were debunked? Alot of people passively view this site, don't make posts, but they read. They see the handful of Democrats here all respond in unison, and you are clearly lying right now. It makes you look really bad, and in doing this you strip votes from Biden. I don't have to worry about hurting Trump, because I hold to the truth, and systemmatically debunk you.
You will continue to look the fool, until the election, and then President Trump will be sworn back in. Kamala hasn't changed the dynamics of the race, she's still losing like Biden was. That's what really matters. And nobody will remember your broken poll that isn't reputable, and isn't taken seriously. It doesn't reflect polls by REAL historians. Find polls by real historians, preferably one that strives at being unbiased, systemmatic, explaining it's methodology and tries to account for and control the variables. That's the heart of polling science.
@Dignaga How nice for you to need to toot your own horn. Ineffective, but sweet. I don’t have to boast about my accomplishments. I can stand on my own without adding false self-importance as you clearly need to.
I gave you a survey by historians and presidency experts that you tried to malign by calling them members of some golf association, right after saying that historians have a higher threshold for the truth. So you lied, because you don’t like their conclusions. And you lied that they had a left wing bias. The group included members of both major parties and independents. And the survey results are very similar to other past surveys. The same groups of presidents appear at the top, bottom, and mid range. There is nothing surprising about the results at all. There is a reason you didn’t cite previous surveys, because they show essentially the same results this one does. And you know it, but choose to lie by omission.
I highly doubt our exchange will cost Harris the election. Or even change a single vote. How typically pompous of you, the self-proclaimed master debater, to believe anyone really cares what either of us say.
Oh, and by the way, I’m not a Democrat and have been a registered independent since the late 1970s. Before that I was a registered Republican. I have voted for both Republicans and Democrats in every election up to 2018, so there is no need to lie again and lump me in with Democrats, though of course you will.
