No. of Recommendations: 8
One of the strengths of our two party system has been that essentially every person to be nominated as his party's standard bearer has been temperamentally suited to be President. I think that cuts across both parties, and pretty much covers even our two more recent, more controversial Presidents, Messrs Clinton and Bush.

Carter, however, shows the danger of weird pockets of history. In more "normal" times, the Democrats would have nominated Scoop Jackson, Humphrey again, something like that. Decent or not, Carter is probably the only *candidate* from the series of Federalist/Democratic, Whig/Democratic, or Republican/Democratic candidates in the history of the US who was temperamentally unsuited. There's an old saying that very few great men were good men... I think this proves that a good man can be an appalling and abysmal leader, and far from a great man.
Print the post  

Announcements

What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement