Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

The metric thing would have been helpful and it’s hard to know how things would have turned out without the GOP making secret deals with Iran to keep the hostages longer. Carter is just an intensely decent man.

He was right about climate too. He had solar panels put on the white house.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

The metric thing would have been helpful and it’s hard to know how things would have turned out without the GOP making secret deals with Iran to keep the hostages longer. Carter is just an intensely decent man.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

He was right about the metric system and it's a damn shame we didn't adopt it. So stupid to have a cumbersome old system that isn't in sync with the rest of the world just because people are too rigid to adapt to something new and superior to the old ways.

Ehh. I've lived in metric countries for years (more than a decade actually) and I don't see a particular virtue to metric over American or the old Imperial. If anything, the American/Imperial system is more intuitive to everyday usage and more accurately reflects how we perceive and handle measurement. The current American model where a lot of measurement in industry and packaging is already quietly in metric works just fine and dandy. The reason we haven't switched over to metric is because... there really is no point. It doesn't make anything better or more efficient.

It’s more intuitive because we have 12 fingers and 3 feet? I think maybe you don’t get math if you don’t understand why metric is easier. The only reason it’s not efficient to switch to metric is because we already have everything here set up in the bizarro random system we have now.

I think PP meant it’s more initiative in the sense that an inch is roughly the size of the long bone of an adult thumb, a foot roughly the same size as an adult foot, etc. The measures are somewhat relateable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.


That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.


He was right about the metric system and it's a damn shame we didn't adopt it. So stupid to have a cumbersome old system that isn't in sync with the rest of the world just because people are too rigid to adapt to something new and superior to the old ways.


Ehh. I've lived in metric countries for years (more than a decade actually) and I don't see a particular virtue to metric over American or the old Imperial. If anything, the American/Imperial system is more intuitive to everyday usage and more accurately reflects how we perceive and handle measurement. The current American model where a lot of measurement in industry and packaging is already quietly in metric works just fine and dandy. The reason we haven't switched over to metric is because... there really is no point. It doesn't make anything better or more efficient.


It’s more intuitive because we have 12 fingers and 3 feet? I think maybe you don’t get math if you don’t understand why metric is easier. The only reason it’s not efficient to switch to metric is because we already have everything here set up in the bizarro random system we have now.


I think PP meant it’s more initiative in the sense that an inch is roughly the size of the long bone of an adult thumb, a foot roughly the same size as an adult foot, etc. The measures are somewhat relateable.

Sure, because all men and women have the same thumb and foot size. /s

Even the inventors of the system, the British (and their commonwealth nations), have gone to metric. Even they know it's not more "initiative".

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.


That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.


He was right about the metric system and it's a damn shame we didn't adopt it. So stupid to have a cumbersome old system that isn't in sync with the rest of the world just because people are too rigid to adapt to something new and superior to the old ways.


Ehh. I've lived in metric countries for years (more than a decade actually) and I don't see a particular virtue to metric over American or the old Imperial. If anything, the American/Imperial system is more intuitive to everyday usage and more accurately reflects how we perceive and handle measurement. The current American model where a lot of measurement in industry and packaging is already quietly in metric works just fine and dandy. The reason we haven't switched over to metric is because... there really is no point. It doesn't make anything better or more efficient.


It’s more intuitive because we have 12 fingers and 3 feet? I think maybe you don’t get math if you don’t understand why metric is easier. The only reason it’s not efficient to switch to metric is because we already have everything here set up in the bizarro random system we have now.


I think PP meant it’s more initiative in the sense that an inch is roughly the size of the long bone of an adult thumb, a foot roughly the same size as an adult foot, etc. The measures are somewhat relateable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

He was right about the metric system and it's a damn shame we didn't adopt it. So stupid to have a cumbersome old system that isn't in sync with the rest of the world just because people are too rigid to adapt to something new and superior to the old ways.

Ehh. I've lived in metric countries for years (more than a decade actually) and I don't see a particular virtue to metric over American or the old Imperial. If anything, the American/Imperial system is more intuitive to everyday usage and more accurately reflects how we perceive and handle measurement. The current American model where a lot of measurement in industry and packaging is already quietly in metric works just fine and dandy. The reason we haven't switched over to metric is because... there really is no point. It doesn't make anything better or more efficient.

It’s more intuitive because we have 12 fingers and 3 feet? I think maybe you don’t get math if you don’t understand why metric is easier. The only reason it’s not efficient to switch to metric is because we already have everything here set up in the bizarro random system we have now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

He was right about the metric system and it's a damn shame we didn't adopt it. So stupid to have a cumbersome old system that isn't in sync with the rest of the world just because people are too rigid to adapt to something new and superior to the old ways.

Ehh. I've lived in metric countries for years (more than a decade actually) and I don't see a particular virtue to metric over American or the old Imperial. If anything, the American/Imperial system is more intuitive to everyday usage and more accurately reflects how we perceive and handle measurement. The current American model where a lot of measurement in industry and packaging is already quietly in metric works just fine and dandy. The reason we haven't switched over to metric is because... there really is no point. It doesn't make anything better or more efficient.

It’s more intuitive because we have 12 fingers and 3 feet? I think maybe you don’t get math if you don’t understand why metric is easier. The only reason it’s not efficient to switch to metric is because we already have everything here set up in the bizarro random system we have now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

He was right about the metric system and it's a damn shame we didn't adopt it. So stupid to have a cumbersome old system that isn't in sync with the rest of the world just because people are too rigid to adapt to something new and superior to the old ways.

Ehh. I've lived in metric countries for years (more than a decade actually) and I don't see a particular virtue to metric over American or the old Imperial. If anything, the American/Imperial system is more intuitive to everyday usage and more accurately reflects how we perceive and handle measurement. The current American model where a lot of measurement in industry and packaging is already quietly in metric works just fine and dandy. The reason we haven't switched over to metric is because... there really is no point. It doesn't make anything better or more efficient.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

He was right about the metric system and it's a damn shame we didn't adopt it. So stupid to have a cumbersome old system that isn't in sync with the rest of the world just because people are too rigid to adapt to something new and superior to the old ways.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

That’s kinda the takeaway I have thought horrible May be too strong a word. As a kid I recall the little push to go metric in school. He may have been a bit too naive (?) politically (eg, on the release of hostages). He was probably too humble or appeared too weak to deal with some countries who would not have respected that kind of posture in a president.

He was a rare bird.

Anonymous wrote:He's a decent man.
He was a horrible president.
He is one of the only presidents I can remember who used his platform as "former president" to do good post-presidency. He was not obsessed with wealth, as his very modest home and lifestyle prove.

Anonymous wrote:1968 - GOP conspires to scuttle the peace negotiations to end the Vietnam War. Nixon wins election.

1980 - GOP interferes with Iranian Hostage negotiations, Reagan wins the presidency.

2000 - Al Gore wins florida, but a GOP controlled Supreme Court and the "Brooks Brothers" riots instigated by GOP operative Roger Stone throws the election to George W Bush.

2016 - Russian interference in the US Election helps throw the election to Donald Trump. Other countries such as China and Egypt are also involved.

2020 - Trump tries to get Ukraine to aid reelection bid.

Face it, the GOP hasn't had a legitimate election win since 1988, and even then, with Iran-Contra it was not fully sound.