Find other sites about
-
From the page: "Here is a scatterplot of rank vs. experience. If more experience makes you a better President, the dots, each of which is one President, should fall somewhere along the blue theoretical curve--more experience gives you a higher rank (1 being the highest rank). ... There does... more
Reviewed by Phage9740 Sep 03 2008, 12:43pm ( 12 reviews ) • electoral-vote.com
-
rontd
rontd
18K Favs
Recently online -
meol
meol
2,872 Favs
-
theiloth
theiloth
1,344 Favs
-
johnagosox
johnagosox
3,970 Favs
-
NovaNardis
NovaNardis
3,748 Favs
-
notinthepicture
notinth...
96 Favs
-
cjlr
cjlr
5,793 Favs
-
Pageless
Pageless
2,933 Favs
-
Xzizor
Xzizor
10K Favs
-
beautifulcorpse
beautif...
1,505 Favs
- Showing 6 of 12
- Reviews of the site
-
Join StumbleUpon or login to add a review!
-
Reviewed by geriartic1943 on Jul 04, 7:47pm
While an interesting graph, I must questing the investigatory ability of the author, especially that he used the 'most accurate', 'never wrong', and all knowing Wikipedia. I mean, really. Next, where does this ranking come from, who is doing the voting? The presidents that best show the roots of the Constitution or those who work on weakening this country through unconstitutional means. If this country wants to enslave itself by relying on government for everything then it gets want it deserves, but remember, it was under the thumbs of England one time and the people rose up to throw off tyranny, and it will do it again when we are totally enslaved.
-
Rated by zombietalk on Sep 06 2008, 11:40pm
From the page: "David A. Levine of New York has collected the data from Wikipedia and done some analysis of it." Oh, lol. Wikipedia, really? Couldn't bear that extra step of getting data from legitimate sources?
-
Rated by malfist on Sep 04 2008, 6:03am
Does not detail how the ranking of Presidents is reached. For all I can tell he pulled them out of a hat.
-
Reviewed by Faz465 on Sep 03 2008, 9:01pm
'He thinks he can bring reason to people that willfully strap dynamite to themselves and blow them selves to hell.' what you don't understand is that suicide bombers aren't acting randomly, their choices are at the root based on political and economic factors, many of which are directly under our own control. yes, there's propoganda, cultural differences, and religious corruption, but those are all indirect- if we ease tensions and answer for the seeds of radical tactics like suicide bombing, including through diplomacy, those aggrivators will lose their grip. also, whether he was assassinated or not is a pretty darn poor way to judge a presidency. often the most radical and controversial figures in their times are those who are years ahead of their time in fighting for the 'right' side of an issue. and freeing the slaves is a big deal- whether or not it was worth the price or so on (and lincoln's reputation is bolstered by the consensus that it was), i think all of us can admire the courage and sacrifice that goes into action like that.
-
Rated by Phage9740 on Sep 03 2008, 12:43pm
From the page: "Here is a scatterplot of rank vs. experience. If more experience makes you a better President, the dots, each of which is one President, should fall somewhere along the blue theoretical curve--more experience gives you a higher rank (1 being the highest rank). ... There does not appear to be any relation between experience and greatness."
-
Rated by MajorTonykins on Aug 24 2008, 9:22am
Cool, now you guys can shut up about how you can't elect Obama because he's inexperienced and admit you just need an excuse to justify not liking him for less valid reasons.
