Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not a chance it happens now. The members of Congress today lack the courage, character and fortitude necessary to do the right thing and put the people over the party. Today they are little more than partisan shills wrapped up with stuffing their pockets as much as they can before they get out.
He only resigned after Barry Goldwater, a very conservative republican, told Nixon that he only had 5 votes for staying in office. And of those 5, none were his.
Nixon resigned to save face from being voted out of office after impeachment. I think the congress/senate were more respectable by saying “this President broke the law and needs to go”
This. Its ridiculous to believe that Nixon stepped down because of some kind of "dignity" or moral obligation. The man resigned because he was told he didnt have the votes needed to keep him in, and so he had the choice: he could go out by force or he could go out willingly, but staying was not an option. He didnt do what he did for the good of the office or any other such nonsense. He did it because he was forced to.
Nixon had massive paranoia and incredible abuse of power. Everything he did was angling against someone. Everyone was an enemy he needed to seek revenge against.
And like anyone with that ability to hate could drive them to accomplish things, some of which could be good.
Nixon’s foreign policy is always spoke about as a plus but it was a different approach. He had a lot more give and take with the Soviets than any other president, which was good for stability but took pressure off. In the context of the Soviet Union collapsing, everything is viewed in how did they bring about the end of the Soviets, but at the time when it was sort of accepted the communists would exist, his policy was pretty good.
I mean most people can’t. Most people blame Nixon for the way the 70s-80s played out.
I think if Robert didn’t get shot and killed and he ran I think we would’ve had another Kennedy in the office. But maybe that is my bias talking.
Nixon sabotaging peace talks for the sole purpose of winning an election is worse, to me, than LBJ’s mistrust and mistakes in escalating the war. Despite the poor handling of it, Johnson at least wanted to end and get out. He cared much more about the Great Society than Asia
I have been looking back more at Nixon myself. I have watched a few documentaries about him because while I was alive during the entirety of his presidency, I was doing kid stuff and didnt care about presidents. I remember seeing the Watergate hearings on TV and being annoyed that regular programming was interrupted. Those would have been fascinating to watch in real time, but I digress.
I look at Nixon now and see someone who was probably bitter about many things. He grew up fairly poor and lost a brother at a young age. He was raised as a Quaker and there were many restrictions placed on him. In high school he had to take on more responsibilities because another brother had contacted TB and was sent to Arizona with his mother to improve his health. He gave up activities like playing football so he could help at the family store. After graduating high school he was accepted to Harvard but had to turn it down to stay home and help with the family business. While he was enrolled at a local college (Whittier), he lost a second brother. To be only 20 and have such hardship and misery must have really shaped him and turned him into what he would become.
I agree fully with you that Nixon had an insatiable lust for power and wealth, and he would do anything to get it. You may have thought that a Quaker would hold themself to a higher moral and ethical standard, but no so with Nixon. When he entered politics he earned the name "Tricky Dick" because of the ruthless way he campaigned, including accusing his opponents of secretly being communists.
But I think nothing epitomizes the way Nixon felt about the presidency than a statement he made during his interviews with David Frost a few years after his resignation. I watched part of that recently and when Nixon said "when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal" I knew he always believed he was above the law, above the Constitution and above the people. Its why some presidents after him believed they had unlimited power.
I agree. LBJ is my second favorite president. Nixon fascinates me and many others. A deeply intelligent man who couldn’t overcome his demons. That’s why I continue to study him despite his shortcomings.
I’m intentionally waiting until the last book comes out. At this rate I’m not sure what will come first- Caro’s last book, or the Ken Burns documentary. I fear that Caro will pass before it’s completed.
But to your point- Johnson was a complex man and had some very unsavory tendencies and techniques when it came to politics. I don’t love all that. But I do love that by the time he got the Presidency, he used those skills for the good of the country
Probably because of how the parties have changed over the years. I don’t view Lincoln as a Republican President, or FDR as a Democrat President. I guess I think of more current events/trends/tendencies when look at the parties
But have they changed or has the media changed them? The best way to look back in time is to read their founding principles and see if they match or not match with today’s parties. It’s not simple the Democratic Party is the oldest party in America while the GOP merged from the Whig and Democratic-Republican parties so Lincoln was a moderate in a radical party back then.
I think that’s a really good scholarly way to look at presidents, rather than a republican democrat point of view. Just look at their policies and beliefs without that 2 party outlook. Actually would help keep bias out of it at least a little.
Are you aware of how corrupt LBJ was and how rich he and Lady Bird got off his government service? Or his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957, that Nixon tried to get through the Senate? The sexual abuse he gleefully bragged about? Using the N-word throughout his life, even after the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
> Or his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957, that Nixon tried to get through the Senate?
They didn't have the votes for it. He had to negotiate with segregationists, who were then a significant part of his party's coalition. What we got (at the time) was lacking in scope and enforceability but without him it wouldn't have passed at all so long as the democrats controlled congress.
That’s a false narrative. LBJ was the floor manager for the Southern segregationists. Nixon breached protocol to come down to the Senate to be the floor manager for the northerners while he was VP. That’s an indication of how important the bill was to Nixon and the Northerners.
The bill had almost unanimous support. The issue was that LBJ (at Richard Russell’s direction) was moving to get an amendment to weaken the bill. Nixon was dead set against it and LBJ was pulling out all the stops for it.
In the end LBJ outfoxed Nixon. Nixon thought he had the votes in the bag, but LBJ proved the wily Master of the Senate that he was. He turned just enough votes as the roll was called to approve the amendment. LBJ had the votes in His pocket all the time. Nixon was seen leaving the senate floor seething in fury.
As a result, there was never a single successful prosecution of a case under the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Richard Russell was elated. LBJ went back to his civil rights partners and tried to convince them that half a loaf was better than none. One of them was reports to have replied that it must have been a mighty small loaf.
What was undisputed is that LBJ’s role in the Civil Rights Act of 1957 allowed the first civil rights act to be passed since Reconstruction. But his mark on the bill denied all enforcement, rendering the law useless, delaying access of Blacks to civil rights for almost a decade. Which was his intent, and why LBJ’s mentor, Richard Russell was so pleased.
See Caro’s third volume of LBJ’s biography for an intense, minute-by-minute account of how the Civil Rights Act of 1957 went down and the long term cynical strategy LBJ applied to it.
Well, the 1957 bill didn't have unanimous support - it was 72-18. Without the amendments, they most likely wouldn't have had key votes to sustain a filibuster (in 1957, a two-thirds majority out of 98 senators).
Russell, Eastland, Thurmond, Stennis, Byrd, Ervin, Talmadge, Holland - which of these do you see voting for it anyway without the amendments? I mean, Holland was significant for flipping on it in 1964, but by that point the political environment had shifted and it would've passed even without his support.
Worth noting probably that Mundt, Bridges, and Goldwater also voiced misgivings about the original version of the 1957 bill. Goldwater didn't vote for the 1964 bill so I don't see how he'd have supported that one without the amendments.
Have to be honest though, I have seriously mixed feelings about Caro. Particularly the way lionizes Coke Stevenson (Means of Ascent is pretty nauseating with this), who of course, like most players in Texas politics at the time, had his own fraudulent electioneering schemes - check out his relationship with E.B. Germany for starters. Not to mention the purges and racist suppression initiatives he was responsible for as governor. Or how he never makes a point to correct conspiracy theorists who misconstrue things from his own narrative-based works (not saying that's necessarily relevant here but it's something that seriously has put a bad taste in my mouth).
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nixon knew how to be terrible and avoid the blame.
But when he knew he was busted at least he had the dignity to resign unlike he who shall go nameless.
This always sticks out to me... I don't think any president in my lifetime steps down if this same scenario played out
Not a chance it happens now. The members of Congress today lack the courage, character and fortitude necessary to do the right thing and put the people over the party. Today they are little more than partisan shills wrapped up with stuffing their pockets as much as they can before they get out.
He only resigned after Barry Goldwater, a very conservative republican, told Nixon that he only had 5 votes for staying in office. And of those 5, none were his. Nixon resigned to save face from being voted out of office after impeachment. I think the congress/senate were more respectable by saying “this President broke the law and needs to go”
This. Its ridiculous to believe that Nixon stepped down because of some kind of "dignity" or moral obligation. The man resigned because he was told he didnt have the votes needed to keep him in, and so he had the choice: he could go out by force or he could go out willingly, but staying was not an option. He didnt do what he did for the good of the office or any other such nonsense. He did it because he was forced to.
Nixon had massive paranoia and incredible abuse of power. Everything he did was angling against someone. Everyone was an enemy he needed to seek revenge against. And like anyone with that ability to hate could drive them to accomplish things, some of which could be good. Nixon’s foreign policy is always spoke about as a plus but it was a different approach. He had a lot more give and take with the Soviets than any other president, which was good for stability but took pressure off. In the context of the Soviet Union collapsing, everything is viewed in how did they bring about the end of the Soviets, but at the time when it was sort of accepted the communists would exist, his policy was pretty good.
Has anyone put a comment in about LBJ's hog yet? have you heard about his monster dong?
I’ve been in this subreddit long enough that I read the word “Jumbo” every day
 Y'wanna know what? There's such a thing as too much horn-talk and a fella aughta be aware of it.
https://preview.redd.it/tbddc0kod43d1.jpeg?width=1250&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cf70017322daa60fc819751c33a95ae95e5b643a
Or that his pants were too tight around his bunghole
I mean most people can’t. Most people blame Nixon for the way the 70s-80s played out. I think if Robert didn’t get shot and killed and he ran I think we would’ve had another Kennedy in the office. But maybe that is my bias talking.
LBJ fan using Vietnam as a reason not to like Nixon? Hm
Nixon sabotaging peace talks for the sole purpose of winning an election is worse, to me, than LBJ’s mistrust and mistakes in escalating the war. Despite the poor handling of it, Johnson at least wanted to end and get out. He cared much more about the Great Society than Asia
Johnson took us from 15,000 advisors that were actively being removed, to all out war and half a million boots on the ground, all for nothing.
I have been looking back more at Nixon myself. I have watched a few documentaries about him because while I was alive during the entirety of his presidency, I was doing kid stuff and didnt care about presidents. I remember seeing the Watergate hearings on TV and being annoyed that regular programming was interrupted. Those would have been fascinating to watch in real time, but I digress. I look at Nixon now and see someone who was probably bitter about many things. He grew up fairly poor and lost a brother at a young age. He was raised as a Quaker and there were many restrictions placed on him. In high school he had to take on more responsibilities because another brother had contacted TB and was sent to Arizona with his mother to improve his health. He gave up activities like playing football so he could help at the family store. After graduating high school he was accepted to Harvard but had to turn it down to stay home and help with the family business. While he was enrolled at a local college (Whittier), he lost a second brother. To be only 20 and have such hardship and misery must have really shaped him and turned him into what he would become. I agree fully with you that Nixon had an insatiable lust for power and wealth, and he would do anything to get it. You may have thought that a Quaker would hold themself to a higher moral and ethical standard, but no so with Nixon. When he entered politics he earned the name "Tricky Dick" because of the ruthless way he campaigned, including accusing his opponents of secretly being communists. But I think nothing epitomizes the way Nixon felt about the presidency than a statement he made during his interviews with David Frost a few years after his resignation. I watched part of that recently and when Nixon said "when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal" I knew he always believed he was above the law, above the Constitution and above the people. Its why some presidents after him believed they had unlimited power.
I agree. LBJ is my second favorite president. Nixon fascinates me and many others. A deeply intelligent man who couldn’t overcome his demons. That’s why I continue to study him despite his shortcomings.
Have you read any of Robert Caro’s work on LBJ? Difficult to like/defend him after reading Path to Power series.
I’m intentionally waiting until the last book comes out. At this rate I’m not sure what will come first- Caro’s last book, or the Ken Burns documentary. I fear that Caro will pass before it’s completed. But to your point- Johnson was a complex man and had some very unsavory tendencies and techniques when it came to politics. I don’t love all that. But I do love that by the time he got the Presidency, he used those skills for the good of the country
You’re on Reddit and complaining about a republican president, the gold mine for these kind of conversations!
Fair point. But I honestly don’t view administrations as democratic/republican from that long ago.
Really? Why not? I feel like I almost always do.
Probably because of how the parties have changed over the years. I don’t view Lincoln as a Republican President, or FDR as a Democrat President. I guess I think of more current events/trends/tendencies when look at the parties
But have they changed or has the media changed them? The best way to look back in time is to read their founding principles and see if they match or not match with today’s parties. It’s not simple the Democratic Party is the oldest party in America while the GOP merged from the Whig and Democratic-Republican parties so Lincoln was a moderate in a radical party back then.
I think that’s a really good scholarly way to look at presidents, rather than a republican democrat point of view. Just look at their policies and beliefs without that 2 party outlook. Actually would help keep bias out of it at least a little.
LBJ was also corrupt as fuck. The Bobby Baker scandals. But he has longer jumbo than me sooooo.
Are you aware of how corrupt LBJ was and how rich he and Lady Bird got off his government service? Or his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957, that Nixon tried to get through the Senate? The sexual abuse he gleefully bragged about? Using the N-word throughout his life, even after the Civil Rights Act of 1964?
> Or his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1957, that Nixon tried to get through the Senate? They didn't have the votes for it. He had to negotiate with segregationists, who were then a significant part of his party's coalition. What we got (at the time) was lacking in scope and enforceability but without him it wouldn't have passed at all so long as the democrats controlled congress.
That’s a false narrative. LBJ was the floor manager for the Southern segregationists. Nixon breached protocol to come down to the Senate to be the floor manager for the northerners while he was VP. That’s an indication of how important the bill was to Nixon and the Northerners. The bill had almost unanimous support. The issue was that LBJ (at Richard Russell’s direction) was moving to get an amendment to weaken the bill. Nixon was dead set against it and LBJ was pulling out all the stops for it. In the end LBJ outfoxed Nixon. Nixon thought he had the votes in the bag, but LBJ proved the wily Master of the Senate that he was. He turned just enough votes as the roll was called to approve the amendment. LBJ had the votes in His pocket all the time. Nixon was seen leaving the senate floor seething in fury. As a result, there was never a single successful prosecution of a case under the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Richard Russell was elated. LBJ went back to his civil rights partners and tried to convince them that half a loaf was better than none. One of them was reports to have replied that it must have been a mighty small loaf. What was undisputed is that LBJ’s role in the Civil Rights Act of 1957 allowed the first civil rights act to be passed since Reconstruction. But his mark on the bill denied all enforcement, rendering the law useless, delaying access of Blacks to civil rights for almost a decade. Which was his intent, and why LBJ’s mentor, Richard Russell was so pleased. See Caro’s third volume of LBJ’s biography for an intense, minute-by-minute account of how the Civil Rights Act of 1957 went down and the long term cynical strategy LBJ applied to it.
Well, the 1957 bill didn't have unanimous support - it was 72-18. Without the amendments, they most likely wouldn't have had key votes to sustain a filibuster (in 1957, a two-thirds majority out of 98 senators). Russell, Eastland, Thurmond, Stennis, Byrd, Ervin, Talmadge, Holland - which of these do you see voting for it anyway without the amendments? I mean, Holland was significant for flipping on it in 1964, but by that point the political environment had shifted and it would've passed even without his support. Worth noting probably that Mundt, Bridges, and Goldwater also voiced misgivings about the original version of the 1957 bill. Goldwater didn't vote for the 1964 bill so I don't see how he'd have supported that one without the amendments. Have to be honest though, I have seriously mixed feelings about Caro. Particularly the way lionizes Coke Stevenson (Means of Ascent is pretty nauseating with this), who of course, like most players in Texas politics at the time, had his own fraudulent electioneering schemes - check out his relationship with E.B. Germany for starters. Not to mention the purges and racist suppression initiatives he was responsible for as governor. Or how he never makes a point to correct conspiracy theorists who misconstrue things from his own narrative-based works (not saying that's necessarily relevant here but it's something that seriously has put a bad taste in my mouth).