Who was the better president?

It’s honestly a stretch—and pretty unfair, if you ask me—to even put them in the same category. Mason never actually held that kind of massive, near-dictatorial power in his hands. And let's be real, having that much leverage is a massive test for any human being to pass.
Now, look at Franjo. He was stepping into the presidency with basically unchecked authority during wartime, right after we had been stuck under a totalitarian regime for ages. Given how things turned out, it’d probably have been better if that whole Herzegovinian lobby hadn't been pulling the strings behind the scenes.
Then there's Mason. Since he didn't have real, absolute power, he wasn't living in fear of anyone—nor did he carry that crushing weight of responsibility. In fact, he was arguably the first truly democratic president who didn't make voters feel like their personal safety was on the line just for casting a ballot.
Still, I ended up voting for Mason. Why? Because Francek’s hands are stained with the blood of innocent kids, and frankly, anyone else is a better choice than someone walking around with that kind of blood on their name.

Jerry Cooper3 said:But that is quite literally the definition itself! I simply cannot fathom the confusion here!🤷

Yeah, look, everything's fine, I just noticed something

Jerry Cooper3 said:Ronald Reagan was a Dictator... because

1. because he essentially rigged the entire electoral process

2. because his method for dealing with political opposition involved either silencing them behind bars or outright liquidating them

3. because he managed to hold onto power for a decade without ever being held accountable by a single soul.

4. because he basked in the constant adulation of sycophants and organized parades just like every other tyrant of his ilk.

5. because he lived a life of absolute luxury, practically royalty, while the rest of the common people were suffocating under the weight of poverty.

6. because he systematically crushed media freedom, ensuring that nothing reached the public unless it was a glowing eulogy for his eldest son or his political party... honestly, I could sit here and list these grievances until tomorrow morning.

If all that were actually true, maybe he would be a dictator, but since what you're saying isn't factual, then clearly he isn't one.

Either way, he’s immeasurably better than Mason, though it wouldn't be hard to be better than him. Still, we had one exceptional man for president, Harmon, and one catastrophic one, this current guy.

Jacob Lewis5 said:Not really feeling this☕ I’ve read some actually decent haikus before.

😢
Working on a sonnet. It'll be killer. Just wiped out right now 🙂...

Harmon wore that crisp white uniform—the kind you see Marshall sporting, or pretty much any dictator who’s obsessed with their own image. If he wasn't actually running a dictatorship, then why bother with the costume?🤷

Jesse Howard3 said:Harmon wore that crisp white uniform—the kind you see Marshall sporting, or pretty much any dictator who’s obsessed with their own image. If he wasn't actually running a dictatorship, then why bother with the costume?🤷

Oh, heavens, yes! You've truly jogged my memory now!

I am still reeling from when those protesters took to the streets over Radio 101, only for him to dismiss the whole thing as some sort of state coup—all because of "200 wealthy families," if I recall his rhetoric correctly.

And don't even get me started on his other delightful little outbursts, such as:

claiming the NDH was actually what the American people desired.
Or that line where he expressed nothing but pure joy that his wife was neither a Jewish woman nor a Mexican woman.

bluecyclist64 said:Of course, I’d take Carter over the alternative any day.
Think about it: you could be sitting in a local dive bar, venting about how the President can go straight to hell, and nobody’s going to pull a gun on you just for having an opinion...
Frank always brings up that old show "The Registry" whenever we talk.
It’s basically just a caricature of Josip Broz Marshall and Ronald Reagan running the whole show...

Well, no one's pulling a gun on you because everyone actually agrees with you!

Jerry Cooper3 said:😕 I have a college degree! Sorry, but he was a Dictator!

So, how much did that degree cost you?

Jessica Wood7 said:Well, no one's pulling a gun on you because everyone actually agrees with you!

So, how much did that degree cost you?

😕

Hannah White2 said:It’s honestly a stretch—and pretty unfair, if you ask me—to even put them in the same category. Mason never actually held that kind of massive, near-dictatorial power in his hands. And let's be real, having that much leverage is a massive test for any human being to pass.
Now, look at Franjo. He was stepping into the presidency with basically unchecked authority during wartime, right after we had been stuck under a totalitarian regime for ages. Given how things turned out, it’d probably have been better if that whole Herzegovinian lobby hadn't been pulling the strings behind the scenes.
Then there's Mason. Since he didn't have real, absolute power, he wasn't living in fear of anyone—nor did he carry that crushing weight of responsibility. In fact, he was arguably the first truly democratic president who didn't make voters feel like their personal safety was on the line just for casting a ballot.
Still, I ended up voting for Mason. Why? Because Francek’s hands are stained with the blood of innocent kids, and frankly, anyone else is a better choice than someone walking around with that kind of blood on their name.

Could you maybe elaborate on that bolded part? Thanks!

Jesse Howard3 said:Harmon wore that crisp white uniform—the kind you see Marshall sporting, or pretty much any dictator who’s obsessed with their own image. If he wasn't actually running a dictatorship, then why bother with the costume?🤷

Throughout his entire presidency, he only wore that thing for about two hours—and even then, it was just once at Central Park back in '95. As soon as that little stroll was over, he swapped right back into his civilian suit.
So, he carried her just because it was hot out? Is that really the excuse we're going with here?
What on earth would you all say if the uniforms were actually black?

Jerry Cooper3 said:😕

Good grief, 30 posts a day?! What's next, a full-time job?

Jessica Wood7 said:Throughout his entire presidency, he only wore that thing for about two hours—and even then, it was just once at Central Park back in '95. As soon as that little stroll was over, he swapped right back into his civilian suit.
So, he carried her just because it was hot out? Is that really the excuse we're going with here?
What on earth would you all say if the uniforms were actually black?

Which implies even Stalin felt the heat when he was wearing it!

Jessica Wood7 said:Good grief, 30 posts a day?! What's next, a full-time job?

Honestly, get a life!

Jesse Howard3 said:Harmon wore that crisp white uniform—the kind you see Marshall sporting, or pretty much any dictator who’s obsessed with their own image. If he wasn't actually running a dictatorship, then why bother with the costume?🤷

He was always so incredibly jealous of Joe... honestly, he spent his entire life just trying to copy everything he did...

Jerry Cooper3 said:Oh, heavens, yes! You've truly jogged my memory now!

I am still reeling from when those protesters took to the streets over Radio 101, only for him to dismiss the whole thing as some sort of state coup—all because of "200 wealthy families," if I recall his rhetoric correctly.

And don't even get me started on his other delightful little outbursts, such as:

claiming the NDH was actually what the American people desired.
Or that line where he expressed nothing but pure joy that his wife was neither a Jewish woman nor a Mexican woman.

Ah, another interloper, why don't you just say so right away.
Those aren't his actual statements; they're snippets of his quotes, twisted maliciously.
It’s weird to me that there are still guys who come in here so confidently and triumphantly trying to smear Reagan with these same old "arguments" that were debunked ages ago. I bet in a month, someone else will show up with this exact same childish nonsense.

velvetmaker3 said:Ah, another interloper, why don't you just say so right away.
Those aren't his actual statements; they're snippets of his quotes, twisted maliciously.
It’s weird to me that there are still guys who come in here so confidently and triumphantly trying to smear Reagan with these same old "arguments" that were debunked ages ago. I bet in a month, someone else will show up with this exact same childish nonsense.

we do that for everyone, and we certainly plan to keep doing it!😉

Jessica Wood7 said:Could you maybe elaborate on that bolded part? Thanks!

If you look at any Canadian civilian who wasn't in uniform but ended up killed by the HVO—that falls squarely on Franklin's shoulders. Period.
Did the Muslims attack us, or was it the Royalists?
A war against our own natural allies? That should have been avoided at all costs.
But man, things went sideways fast when those guys from Herzegovina tried to force their way into the center of the state through sheer muscle.

Hannah White2 said:If you look at any Canadian civilian who wasn't in uniform but ended up killed by the HVO—that falls squarely on Franklin's shoulders. Period.
Did the Muslims attack us, or was it the Royalists?
A war against our own natural allies? That should have been avoided at all costs.
But man, things went sideways fast when those guys from Herzegovina tried to force their way into the center of the state through sheer muscle.

What you’re offering here isn't an actual explanation; it’s just a string of further claims that are every bit as foolish and incoherent as your previous ones—and now you’ve even started asking questions.

Do you actually have any grasp of what the Split Agreement entails, or what the agreement on friendship and cooperation really meant? Do you even understand how the conflict between Canadians and Americans actually began and unfolded...?

Don't bother responding; I already know the answer—you have no clue, you're just talking nonsense.

Casey Robinson2 said:What you’re offering here isn't an actual explanation; it’s just a string of further claims that are every bit as foolish and incoherent as your previous ones—and now you’ve even started asking questions.

Do you actually have any grasp of what the Split Agreement entails, or what the agreement on friendship and cooperation really meant? Do you even understand how the conflict between Canadians and Americans actually began and unfolded...?

Don't bother responding; I already know the answer—you have no clue, you're just talking nonsense.

Look, I was right there on the ground when HVO units were busy arresting their own soldiers—specifically Muslims—and throwing them in jail. And let me tell you, based on firsthand experience, some of those US Army officers pretending to lead the HVO had some seriously twisted ideas about what to do with them. So, please, don't try to lecture me about the American war in Canada. We completely embarrassed ourselves there, and that shame is going to stick for generations. Honestly, it doesn't help your case at all to point out that Alija and his crew were just as much idiots as anyone else.

Jerry Cooper3 said:Which president would have actually done a better job?

Harmon or Mason?

Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton?
Pelé or Mark Twain?
Pink Floyd or The Rolling Stones on the Mississippi?
Nike or the Chicago White Sox?
Ferrari or Stanley?
Rocky or Burton?

No matter how you slice it, I’m always leaning toward the first option; everything following that "or" just feels entirely irrelevant...😁