What does /his think of this man

>>2748738
I don't really think of him

who?

>>2748743
Jimmy Carter

Bland president, decent dude.

Better than the Bushes, Obama, and Clinton but that's not saying much.

>>2748738
Good intelligent dude with good intentions, walking disaster of a politician. I literally do not think there is anyone on this earth that did more damage to U.S. foreign relations than Jimmy Carter

>>2748798
Bush and Reagan fucked us over more than this great man

>>2748798
>I literally do not think there is anyone on this earth that did more damage to U.S. foreign relations than Jimmy Carter

Explain

>>2748738
Greatest ex-president.

Also, all the dictators he met died of unnatural causes except Fidel Castro.

>>2748798
>more than dubya
>more than a dozen others
explain yourself

>>2748738
Where's my Canal, Jimmy?

>>2748738
Mostly mediocre president
Not entirely his fault though.

Fucking golden human being

Too pure for us

he's like the U2 of presidents

>>2748807
>>2748818
His foreign policy led to decades-long allies getting in bed with the Soviets. We're talking about countries that killed communists for fun at the bidding of the United States suddenly opening diplomatic and trade relations with COMBLOC because Carter purposely alienated them. See: Argentina, Chile, Ethiopia, Israel, Nicaragua (Commies took hold because of Carter), El Salvador, Angola (fell to Commies because of Carter), Mozambique becoming commie, fall of Rhodesia, completely fucked the Iranian issue, etc. Carter singlehandedly undid 30 years of the advancement of U.S. foreign policy.

>>2748805
>>2748818
>Bush
Foreign citizens may not have liked him, but allied governments didn't run off and get in bed with our biggest enemy

he actually brought down the soviet union and brought america prosperity in the 80s.

>>2748835
Joy division + prozac and a Christ complex that just won't go away?

>>2748838
>opens trade with other countries
>a bad thing
????

>>2748738
Good man, decent president.

Reagan gets credit for the pay off for a great deal of Carter's policies.

>>2748842
>he actually brought down the soviet union
He didn't tho. You can give him credit for ending detente, but his "harsh" policy was only for the last year of his presidency and had absolutely no teeth to it. There's a reason you don't see actual shifts in Soviet spending until Reagan becomes President.

>>2748855
>attempt to punish allies for violating human rights through sanctions
>attempt to punish the Soviets for invading Afghanistan through sanctions
>proceed to wonder why your allies abandon you and trade with the Soviets and give you a giant middle finger
Yes, brilliant foreign policy. A state should always shun their allies and have them get in bed with their enemy. I can think of many many times where this has worked for the aforementioned state's advantage and totally not been a massive blunder.

>>2748798
funny statement to make considering who is the president now.

Also most people greatly underestimate how much Dubya trashed US standings around the world.

>>2748881
Already addressed >>2748838

>>2748738
Better Christian than any republican p[resident since

>>2748874
>get in bed with their enemy
yes all of europe was conquered by the Soviet armies solely due to Carter.

Just as an aside, anyone old enough to remember if the Americans are dumb stereotype existed before Bush 2? I legit don't know

>>2748890
>lol like if it isn't a complete capitulation it isn't a serious blow
I always love an argument ad absurdum in the evenings.

>>2748892
It has existed since before the U.S. was a sovereign state.

>>2748874
Domestic Oil price deregulation in the USA.

which leads to a huge increase in oil exploration and production. Making a lot of americans rich or at least well employed.

Causing the Oil Glut of the late 80s. Which crippled the Soviet Economy. As they had to export oil to buy grain to feed their mostly urban population. Since Russian grain production didn't recover from the Stalin collectivization until Putin was President.

>>2748895
You're completely overblowing Carter's minimal changes to the foreign scene.

>>2748900
>minimal
>completely altering America's stance towards its allies including ones which were active battlegrounds against the Communist threat is a minimal change
???

>>2748916
>completely altering
he didnt tho

>>2748899
This. As said, Reagan is given credit for that. As well as the economic boom of the early 80's which was mainly thanks to Volcker, a Carter appointment, dropping interest rates.

>>2748923
>he didnt tho
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Jimmy_Carter#Human_rights
Get fucked

>>2748929
This isn't a massive change

>>2748928
if Ted Kennedy had got his way instead of Carter. Oil in the USA would have been nationalized. Imagine how badly that would have gone.

>>2748892
He lent it credence.

>>2748962
>Imagine how badly that would have gone.
why would that have gone badly?

>>2748935
>This isn't a massive change
>turning your back on decades even centuries old allies and funding ideological enemies isn't a massive change
Are you retarded? I am seriously questioning your mental faculties.

>>2749178
>socialized oil in a country that is an importer
>the US government running anything.
>oil prices still set globally unless the USA had cut it self off completely and only used its own oil.
>eco weenie democrats get in charge of the government and kill oil production/exploration for ideological reasons.

>>2748888
Objectively true.

The Republican voters going with Reagan over him was a pretty irrefutable statement that Christianity never actually mattered in the United States.

>>2749243
>turning your back on decades even centuries old allies and funding ideological enemies isn't a massive change
when did this happen?

>>2749354
conservative Christians have been waging a losing culture battle since the 60s.

File: John-Anderson-4.30.16c.png (343KB, 363x536px) Image search: [Google]

343KB, 363x536px

should've lost to this guy