Is Donald Trump the Worst Presidential Candidate in American History?

[M.G.]

Last edited Sat Aug 6, 2016, 11:45 AM - Edit history (1)

Obnoxious, juvenile, totally inexperienced, grossly unqualified for the job of President.


Those would all be fairly accurate descriptors for Donald Trump.

Sixteen years ago, I thought George W. Bush was the most transparently clownish and awful Presidential candidate of my life, and in fact McCain and Romney were slightly less appalling figures than he. (Though Sarah Palin was probably worse.)

Trump has accomplished the near-miracle of being more awful than Bush by any metric I can gauge. Cartoonishly corrupt, self-destructively mean and flagrantly bigoted to boot, with less actual understanding of policy than a typical college student, Trump has set a new low in a Party that defines the term.

Has there ever been a worse Presidential Candidate, or even a worse human being who has dominated the political news cycles this long? Even Nixon at least had an intelligent grasp of geopolitics and didn't openly swindle thousands of working Americans with a scam "university." I can't think of any popular American figure in my lifetime who has actually publically encouraged violence at rallies. And I have never heard of a political figure who spent much of his youth and middle age embroiled in tabloid sex scandals and prone to boasts about his promiscuity go on to lead the "religious right."

[uponit7771]

1. Good question, I've never ever seen this... some say Dole was horrible and the GOP left him in the

... cold and focused on down ballots after he sunk enough in the polls

[M.G.]

2. Dole actually seemed reasonably tolerable for a Republican

I have no idea what Dole was like in private, but by GOP standards he seemed reasonably OK. I do remember him having a decent understanding of actual policy mechanics and being at least somewhat respected by Democrats on the Hill, suggesting that he could probably be trusted to forge bipartisan consensus in a crisis.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

27. Dole just seemed grumpy and crabby

and weirdly kept referring to himself in the 3rd person, "Bobdole." I didn't like him but I didn't think he was horrible. He seemed like an old grouch who was yelling at Bill Clinton, who already had the advantage as the incumbent, to get off his lawn, and it didn't help that he was carrying the taint of Newt Gingrich.

[redstatebluegirl]

28. I hated Dole but I wasn't afraid of him running the country. I wouldn't like his policies but

I didn't fear he would destroy the country like Trump.

[M.G.]

33. More or less my assessment, too.

Last edited Sat Aug 6, 2016, 11:46 AM - Edit history (1)

I remember reading one eloquent and humane quote by Bob Dole when I was taking Poli Sci 101:

"When these political action committees give money, they expect something in return other than good government. There aren't any Poor PACs, or Food Stamp PACs, or Nutrition PACs, or Medicare PACs."

(Thank you Google!)

----

Other than that, my basic sense of Dole - and I was able to vote in the '96 election - was that he was less of a clown than Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America types in the House (more or less the forerunners of the Tea Party) but not someone I thought would make an outstanding leader.

[Mrs. Overall]

3. Yes, Cinnamon Hitler is the worst thing to happen to US politics, EVER!

We are living through an absolutely historic period in politics--it will be studied for generations.

[M.G.]

5. I agree!

I agree completely.

I literally couldn't have imagined a candidate this bad winning a major Party Presidential nomination.

Corrupt, ignorant, totally inexperienced, utterly obnoxious. I can't think of many bad qualities Trump doesn't have!

[NNadir]

4. Well, there was John C. Breckenridge, who was convicted of treason...

...by the United States Senate, of which he was a member.

He ran against Lincoln, Douglas and Bell in a four way race in 1860 which thankfully Lincoln won.

He fought against the United States Army for the Confederates, even though his state, Kentucky, did not secede from the Union.

He was Buchanan's VP; Buchanan holding the distinction of being in a pretty close tie among historians as the worst President in US history, with Andrew Johnson.

Then there was Aaron Burr, who was also a traitor, he narrowly lost the election - which was thrown into the House of Representatives - to Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson was creepy, but at least the democracy survived him. It's not clear it would have survived Burr. Under the constitution of the United States at the time, he actually served as Vice President as the 2nd place finisher.

(Jefferson was elected because constitution at the time awarded electoral votes, 2/5 of a person, to slaves, even though they could not vote and had no power. Without the 2/5 clause, John Adams would have easily been re-elected; with it he came in third.)

Trump is probably a traitor to his country, and the question remains whether or not he is worse than these two. We can say definitively he is the worst candidate in more than a century.

The worst Presidential candidate in the last 100 years - he won the election - was Richard Nixon, followed by Ronald Reagan, who also won, but it is hard to consider either of these awful people to be the equivalent of Trump.

[M.G.]

6. Thanks for the historical perspective

Thank you for your historical perspective.

Trump certainly seems to be uniquely badly suited for modern politics by every measure I can think of, but I would have to research Burr and Breckenridge.

Certainly I'd consider Trump several categories worse than Nixon, as I mentioned in my original post.

[NNadir]

7. Unlike you, I didn't include Bush Jr, but clearly should have. I must be trying...

...to block that awful bit of history out of my mind.

At least Reagan didn't start a war that killed hundreds of thousands of people and left a nation in shambles in order to work out his distressing and puerile Oedipal anxieties.

[M.G.]

10. I agree completely

I agree completely. If I had to, I would take Reagan over George W. Bush, who at least gave us the occasional moderate court pick like O'Connor and showed a willingness to use diplomacy when appropriate, as with Gorbachev.

[unblock]

29. For apportionment of house districts, slaves counted as 3/5th a person

People generally take it as an insult to black people, but of course the real insult was slavery. The slave states actually wanted to count slaves fully because it would give the skate states more seats in the house; the free states wanted not to count slaves at all.

It's seems weird to think of it this way, but in fact if they had not been counted at all, or counted rather less than 3/5th, slavery might have been abolished much earlier.

In fact, the compromise at 3/5th was arrived at so as to keep the balance of power between the slave and free states, setting the stage for the issue to not be resolve for another 76 years.

[M.G.]

34. That is Historically Correct

The 3/5ths compromise, although dramatically symbolic of how Blacks were viewed as less than human in 18th Century America, was actually less injurious to their actual interests than numerically counting them as Whites would have been, because doing so would have given slave states more actual power.

[NNadir]

47. Thank you. You're correct. I was working from memory. I hadn't...

...realized until recently until reading Gary Wills' "Negro President": Jefferson and the Slave Power that according to the tally of people permitted to actually vote under the Constitution at the time, that John Adams actually won the election we are all taught in schools that he lost.

Wills is one of the finest thinkers in American historical writing. I never read any of his books without developing a totally new perspective on a familiar topic. He actually has nice things to say about Burr, which is not to say he changed my mind about him.

(I had to resist a puerile fantasy of pissing on Burr's grave after the 2008 election in which a previous "Worst Vice President ever," was replaced by a more recent "Worst Vice President ever" in the form of Dick Cheny: Burr is buried in Princeton, near where I live. A building at the University is actually named for him.)

The most awesome such book of Wills' that really made me understand this country's history was his beautiful and highly insightful exegesis, "Lincoln at Gettysburg." I believe that book is the one for which he won the Pulitzer Prize. The speech, Wills contents, remade America.

Thanks for your correction. The 3/5 "compromise" is a real stain on our country's history since it obviates the twisted cruelty of slavery, with slavery itself being the worst stain.

[Spider Jerusalem]

48. Breckinridge wasn't "convicted of treason"

the Senate expelled him with a resolution in which they called him a traitor, but he was never tried or convicted (and Burr was acquitted, for that matter, and the acts for which he was tried took place after his term as VP). Also it was three-fifths, not two-fifths.

[Johnny2X2X]

8. Yes

I said to a friend today, Sarah Palin knows more than Trump and would not be as bad of a president.

Trump is the Know Nothing candidate for the Know Nothing Party.

[M.G.]

11. Yes, Sarah Palin is actually a better candidate than Trump

Last edited Fri Aug 5, 2016, 08:09 PM - Edit history (3)

It's astonishing, but, yes, Palin - who actually served a half-term as governor and has legitimate, if limited, executive experience, would probably make a better President than Trump. It's close, because Palin might be a bit dumber than he and seems to be a heavy drinker, at least if current reports are to be believed. She also seems even less self-disciplined than Trump; all her off-script speeches are incomprehensible messes. But Palin has at least never faced serious fraud and racketeering charges and would probably know enough to rely on her advisors for all important decisions.

[liberal N proud]

9. The de-evolution of the Republican candidates

[M.G.]

12. We've got to have hit the bottom this time...

We've got to have hit the basement bottom this year. We've just got to have...

[liberal N proud]

26. Did we not think that with dubya?

Did we not think that with Palin?

Who know who deep this well of negative humanity can go.

[VOX]

13. Of a major party, YES. And because it's 2016...

The effects of his toxicity are felt worldwide, and in an immediate fashion, all in a time when global destruction in mere minutes (nukes) is a potential reality. My opinion is that he should be under psychiatric care for various overlapping disorders.

[M.G.]

14. Thats a good point.

That's a good point. Even if there actually had been a worse candidate than Trump back in, say, the 19th Century, the stakes were a lot lower and the awfulness of such a figure would have been less of an issue.

[mucifer]

15. If you go back REALLY far andrew johnson was maybe the worst

It was horrible that Lincoln chose him to be VP . He was crazy drunk and racist. He was very pro slavery. Who knows what the country would have been like if Lincoln chose a better VP his second term. But he might not have won. johnson really turned the country backwards.

If he had nuclear codes who knows what he would have done.

[M.G.]

16. Certainly, that would be a contender for a Trump level candidate.

Johnson was a lousy President, racist to the bone, and committed to a philosophy of governance which made no sense in post-Civil War America.

Appropriately, he wasn't ever elected to the office he is historically known for having served in.

He was able to get elected to the Senate after his disastrous Presidential tenure, suggesting that he was at least in touch with his constitutents and capable of rebounding from personal defeat. I'm not convinced Trump has either quality, especially the latter.

[unblock]

31. Lincoln wanted a southern democrat who wasn't a confederate

His choices were very limited

[Freddie]

53. Andrew Johnson never ran for president

He was an "accidental president" only because of Lincoln's assassination and did not run for a term in 1868. He was Lincoln's attempt to pick a running mate who would appeal to some Southerners.

[uponit7771]

72. +1, he's the one that took away reparations for slaves and native Americans

[joshcryer]

17. Unquestionably.

[M.G.]

18. Yeah, pretty much.

Yeah, you're right. Even the worst of the worst in previous centuries didn't openly brag about dodging venereal disease - then position themselves as the voice of the deeply religious, or swindle thousands in plain sight.

[joshcryer]

19. There may have been worse but we don't have video of it.

I mean this guy is getting crazier. And it's all on video.

[M.G.]

20. That's true. One thing I can say about Trump...

One thing I can say about Trump is that if one actually voted for the guy - if one honestly thought he was a qualified, serious candidate for the Presidency - one probably needs counseling. His dysfunctionality, juvenality, and obvious buffoonishness are a matter of public record and should be apparent to anyone of average intelligence.

[joshcryer]

21. I think there will never again be a nominee this bad.

He'll be the metric for the "establishment" going forward. Party leaders will never allow it to happen. They'll probably implement a superdelegate style system in the future.

[M.G.]

22. He'll enter popular discourse as a category error.

Very likely, future generations of political science majors as well as average Americans talking history or culture over beer will use "Trump" as synonymous with "obvious political mistake" or "evident buffoon."

"She's a lousy candidate, but no Trump..."

"Even a really unqualified figure, a Trump, would know not to do that..."

[joshcryer]

23. Indeed, Penn Jillette believes his name will become synonymous with loser.

"He really Trump'd that up."

The latest Penn's Sunday School is a must listen. I listen because Penn is like Trumps archenemy, IRL.

[M.G.]

24. Was Penn on "the Apprentice?"

I vaguely remember reading that Penn used be on "The Apprentice". Or am I confusing him with another celebrity?

It's pretty clear that everyone who interacts with Trump and isn't a loyalist or family member can't stand him. I personally know two people who have had some one-on-one interactions with Trump (my dad is one) and they both thought he was an insufferable loudmouth.

[joshcryer]

25. Yeah, twice, and should have won.

Granted, Penn credits that show for boosting his celebrity, but he really shits on Trump over how that show was fake.

[M.G.]

35. I never watched "The Apprentice"

I never watched "The Apprentice." How was it fake?

BTW, how popular a show was it, anyway? I haven't had a TV since back when Mulder and Scully were hot (the first time!)

[joshcryer]

39. At its peak it was the top reality show.

But it's been on a steady decline since its inception.

The main reason it was fake is basically you were running to become a spokesperson for Trump, not actually do a job or be in charge of decisions.

[M.G.]

40. Thanks for letting me know.

I didn't realize the show was basically a scam, but it doesn't surprise me.

Trump is an obvious grifter.

[Freddie]

54. NBC just announced that Trump will not be back on "The Apprentice"

If he loses the election.
There goes the backup plan.

[M.G.]

63. Looks like he's been fired! ;)

[marybourg]

42. Too bad that "to trump"

already is a verb.

[joshcryer]

45. Yeah, but its meaning will change.

A "trump card" will go from being the best card in your hand to the worst card in your hand.

[enid602]

30. credible

Overall, I think even Pat Paulson was a more serious and credible candidate.

[M.G.]

36. I'd take almost any stand-up comedian over Trump.

I'd take almost any joke candidates or stand-up comedians over Trump.

Heck, I'd seriously take Howard the Duck (who ran for President in his own comic book series in '76) over Trump. By all accounts his creator was a fairly decent fellow.

[kestrel91316]

32. Yes. He's a national embarrassment.

[M.G.]

37. Anyone who actually thinks he's a serious and credible Presidential candidate is an embarrassment.

[deathrind]

38. Trump is by far...

The worst presidential candidate this country has ever nominated...at least in my lifetime. Since he is not actually president yet it is unfair to past presidents like Burr / Buchanan or Bush Jr to be compared to him (trump).

Having said that I find it much more disconcerting that Trump has supporters. To me that is the scariest and worst part of this. Trump can be (insert pejorative here) all the negative words one can think of to write but that fact that he pretty much walked away with the republican nomination because of the overwhelming support he has with republican voters I think is far and away much worse than anything Trump is.

[M.G.]

41. Unfortunately true.

At the end of the day, Trump is only relevant because a plurality of Republican voters made him so.

To repeat something I said earlier in this thread - anyone of average intelligence or above who thinks Trump is a plausible, qualified candidate for the Presidency probably needs counseling or education, unless they just think the whole American system is a joke and want to watch it burn. (And honestly, I suspect that's where a sizable chunk of his sane support comes from.)

[M.G.]

43. Great David Axelrod Quote on Trump:

“Donald Trump is Todd Akin. He is Richard Mourdock and Sharron Angle ... but that is really not fair to Akin, Mourdock and Angle. They weren’t nuts. They had political views and others that made them unelectable. With Donald Trump, it is instability. He is an absurd candidate for president. He is a neutron bomb that has gone off in the Republican Party that is destroying anyone near him.”

[Lil Missy]

44. I didn't think it possible to be worse than dumbya, but this scam artist broke that record.

Just as bad - Donald's supporters have to be even dumber than dubs too.

[M.G.]

62. I am a little baffled at his support...

I have to admit I am a little baffled at the support Trump gets.

I could see voting for the guy if, like Heath Ledger's Joker, one thinks the entire system is a joke and just wants to watch it all burn.

I could also see voting for Trump if one is a bigot, or if one buys wholesale into every anti-Clinton conspiracy theory ever floated on the internet.

Beyond those three categories, I have no idea why Trump would get anyone's vote. Honestly, I think anyone of at least average intelligence who seriously considers Trump a qualified, plausible candidate for the Presidency probably needs education or counseling.

[burrowowl]

46. No just the dumbest!

Nixon and Reagan committed treason and got away with it.
The Vietnam War lasted longer and millions of more live lost. Iran Contra caused the death of 200,000 to 250,000 Guatemalan native people, etc.

[M.G.]

67. Nixon and Reagan were criminals, but...

Nixon was a criminal, but the facts of Watergate and the coverup weren't known at the time he was a candidate. Ditto for Reagan and Iran-Contra.

We actually know Trump is facing fraud and racketeering suits as a candidate. That puts him in a whole new category of shadiness...

[burrowowl]

71. Kissinger on behalf of Nixon

Negotiating separately with S. VN while the peace talks were going on under Johnson is not TREASON!
Then I don't know what the HELL IT IS! Even Evert Dirkson said it was treason.

Ditto for Raygun the secret negotiations were going on while Carter was ib office.

[Fast Walker 52]

49. there really is little doubt

which is why this race is so maddening and captivating at the same time

[MoonRiver]

50. In my lifetime, yes. But that's a good thing!

[axiom3]

51. He's definitely the worst modern Presidential candidate IMO

I mean, Romney and McCain were a bunch of crusty, out-of-touch pricks, but even they didn't resort to hatred of pretty much every single demographic group. And GWB, as much of a warmongering maniac he was, at least pretended to be a "compassionate conservative", and denounced hate crimes against Muslims in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. It really reflects poorly on the United States that Donald is getting so much support in the first place.

[M.G.]

60. It's close with Bush

Romney and McCain were substantially less awful than Trump. GWBush comes closer, but Trump's obnoxious narcissism and flagrant bigotry carry an unpleasantness which Bush at least publically avoided.

Bush's Iraq War was a colossal historical blunder, but at least in '00 he didn't have that on his record, and the sad reality is that in '04, many then serving Democratic Senators and politicians had at least initially supported that effort (as had Trump, whatever he now claims) so his awfulness on that count was fairly mainstream. Trump carries political awfulness to a bold new level.

[Chemisse]

52. If you wanted to design the worst possible candidate for president,

Trump would be it.

In fact, the imagination probably could not even come close to just how bad the actual candidate is.

[M.G.]

59. Yeah, he's actually worse than any writer could have come up with.

There's just so much dirt on Trump apart from all the obvious awfulness and craziness which shows up on camera. The media hasn't even gone into a lot of it.

[Freddie]

55. Warren G. Harding

was a puppet of a corrupt Ohio GOP machine. He had no original ideas of his own and did what he was told by his handlers, so I've read. His death of a heart attack near the end of his term was suspicious (poisoning?) and right afterward his wife, who may have had something to do with his death, burned all his papers.
Harding is best remembered now for fathering a love child in a White House closet.
Trump is the ultimate loose cannon which is worse than a puppet IMO.

[M.G.]

58. Harding was an awful President

Harding was an awful President, but he at least did what he was told. Trump might possibly, say, ignore his own Cabinet and start a nuclear war in a fit of pique. So I'd actually consider him a worse candidate.

[rjsquirrel]

56. George Wallace

was scarier. At the time racists were a clear majority of voters.

[M.G.]

57. Wallace was scarier but Trump is actually worse

Last edited Sat Aug 6, 2016, 03:16 PM - Edit history (1)

George Wallace was a disgusting human being and an overt racist, but I'd actually consider him a slightly better candidate than Trump, because he at least had executive experience as governor.

I can respect that many would feel differently on this issue because of Wallace's bigotry, but I'd say, overall, Trump is even worse.

[CK_John]

61. IMO, Aaron Burr Jefferson's VP is my pick.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

64. There are two things you could mean by "worst", and in both cases the answer is "no".

One is "likely to do worst as a candidate" and the other is "likely to do worst as a president". I think the answers are "not even close" and "close, but no" respectively.

In the former stakes, I suspect Trump won't even come close to McGovern or Mondale, and probably not even to Dukakis or Goldwater - my guess is that he'll lose, but probably not massively.

In the latter stakes, I invite you to consider a whole skew of appalling presidents from the early mid 19th century, whose legacy led to the Civil War - I think Trump would rank among the worst presidents, but I don't think his legacy would be as disastrous as Buchanan's.

(Of course, I'm restricting to major-party candidates here - there have been plenty of minor party candidates far worse in both respects).

[M.G.]

65. Good question

In Trump's case, "worst candidate" as I understand it could plausibly either mean worst-qualified in terms of experience, credentials, presentation and temperament to hold the job of President, or simply most likely to do the worst in the election.

I was really thinking the former when I wrote this post.

That's close but not quite identical to what you meant by "likely to do worst as President."

[jcgoldie]

68. Those 19th century presidents...

Didn't have nukes. I would say yes he's the worst ever.

[M.G.]

70. That's true. Trump is especially uniquely unsuited for the Presidency in the modern era.

[Vinca]

66. He might be the first to have such an obvious psychiatric disorder.

[M.G.]

69. Very true.

Trump is a textbook narcissist - even his fans admit that, and he probably has ADD. His emotional
immaturity is beyond satire - the reality of his buffoonish was makes Saturday Night Live seem subtle and restrained.