Suspected U.S. Strike Kills at Least 60 in Pakistan

[Kasz216]

Rath said:

Kasz216 said:
Even then though there is the problem that the big name presidents have fanboys.

It's like Videogame criticism but to an even greater degree. You don't get a doctorate in history or political science because your an unbiased observer.

Oh yeah I totally agree really. But just like videogames its impossible to have a truly objective view of a president thats worth anything. I mean it'd be like rating games purely on the number of polygons and the resolution of the textures.

Anything thats subjective has inherent human bias and any ranking of presidents by historians will have bias - probably just less bias and more information than a list by the general public.

There is bias... then there is fanboysim.

For example... Bias is... "I like SRPGs better therefore i will rank them higher."

Fanboyism is "Nobody wants to flail they're body parts around... wait OMG Natal is going to rule!"

A lot of presidents get a pass because they did something awesome along with doing something good.

Won a major war... well that makes up for infringing everyons constitutional rights during it?

Gave all white men the ability to vote?  Who cares that you almost wiped out countless native american tribes!

etc.

Historical rankings of the presidents tend to be "ends justify the means."