let's find out with a live game???

Oh, nations:

Let's have... Washington in France (maybe he can meet Lafayette there!), Teddy in Germany, Jefferson in Italy, Lincoln in Russia, JFK in Turkey, FDR in Austria (right next to his cousin TR) and the Gipper in England.

So... what happens?

I don't know, but I think Abe and JFK should be a little more careful of Stabs this time around...

If we do a live game, then let's do it, just for the hell of it, in the PERSONA of the President you are... ex. if you're Reagan, you better be a Great Communicator, Teddy's player should be aggressive and likeable, Washington stoic...

What about it- anyone care to be these Presidents with us? ;)

and LOL well put Hunter49r...

http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=21443

Remember, ye who join, the nation you get=the President you have to act like:

Washington in France
Teddy in Germany
Jefferson in Italy
Lincoln in Russia
JFK in Turkey
FDR in Austria
Reagan in England.

I think Jefferson should be French since he bought Louisiana from Napoleon.

Well. Um. As to the hypothetical game.

Everyone would team on Reagan because he would antagonize and make too many enemies. So he would be out early.

JFK would be inexperienced and lose out soon as well, being good at convincing people to side with him but making excessive tactical blunders.

FDR would be very determined and do quite well, but would not be very imaginative and may get beaten in that regard. By the book, he would be.

Teddy would have the same problem as Reagan but not as bad since he could get people to like him with his charm. He would forever think he was better than he really was and would lose due to that.

Lincoln would win. He would know what to do tactically and would make friends as well. He would know that victory comes with costs and as such would not feel compunction about stabbing a friend.

Jefferson would be good too, but would give up more easily, and might feel compunction about a stab.

Washington would be very good, but might try to hedge his bets too much, resulting in an appearance of shakiness.


Yeah. Rundown.

That's a good one, Thucidides...

But I think you've overlooked something...

First, what we do agree on, is that neither JFK nor Reagan could breach very far... both good communicators, but far too agressive and, like you said, neither of them have that Roosevelt "I'm bending the laws here, but it's OK, because I'm a Rossevelt... and my bending rules generally makes sure America doesn't break!" air about him.

And that's what I think's been overlook, and something I did intentionally-

The Roosevelts, Teddy and Franklin... as Germany and Austria, they're natural allies, and as family, even more so.

Can you IMAGINE THAT ALLIANCE? Germany-Austria's usually a great one in any case, but with the ROOSEVELTS at the helm...

Teddy, Franklin, there's so much war skill (Teddy first hand, Franklin from the Oval Office) and so broad an appeal (a Republican, a Democrat, both New Yorkers but both with strong ties to rural America, both huge progressives...)

TR/FDR would be a MONSTER alliance.

And that presents something interesting... what does Lincoln do? FDR's not going to bail on TR, and likewise TR with FDR, so even if Lincoln took out JFK (talk about ironic) and Reagan fell, Lincoln'd still need to find a way up the middle, through the Roosevelts.

And if it boils down to Lincoln vs. the Roosevelts, and Jefferson and Washington are left...

WHO sides with Lincoln then? Not the Southerner Jefferson with his masses of slaves... nice guy (relative to the time) but still, he's not going to go against his party AND principles... and as Italy, he's not in an agressive spot to do fight such a war, anyway... he's not beating Washington...

Which essentially means if Lincoln were to win he'd have to convicne ANOTHER slave holder (albeit a great man who freed his slaves in his will) and Southerner, Washington.

And wouldn't THAT be the biggest political war in US history- arguably (I'd argue for it) the four greatest Presidents going two vs. two...

Washington and Lincoln vs. Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt! :D

But, Teddy was a Rep and FDR was a Dem, so why would they automatically be allies?

because they were cousins! They really sort of stood for the same populist things, they just happened to be on different sides of the Republican flip in philosophy. (I believe Republicans had begun to resemble our present Republicans by FDR's time, but I'm not positive)

Reagan wins... Forever.

*is not going to get into an economic argument*

Yes, FDR really looked up to TR when he was young, and the two stood for the same things- helping the working class, a love of the environment and activity (before struck with polio FDR was very active) and progressive reforms, from social to economic to the military...

Both updated the American military, TR taking it into the 20th century and FDR into the beginnings of the American might today.

Both served as Assistant Secretary of the Navy.

And TR was, on more than one occaision, called only a Republican in name, as he really was a socially reformer... not a Democrat, but a reformer... if TR was alive in FDR's time, he might've been a Democrat, and the flip with FDR.

They WERE two sides of the same coin- and BOTH account for not only creating 20th Century America and Globalized America, but all the GOOD that has come of that...

Bad has come of that as well, to be sure- but so much of the combined 20 YEARS (TR 1901-1908, FDR 1933-1945) of the Roosevelts led to the greatness we see in America, even through the fog today.

And BOTH today would be FURIOUS over the bickering between parties, the partisanship... but, the WORST thing of all perhaps in America today- we cannot HAVE a TR or FDR.

TR made so many enemies on the way up, and once there, and he crossed party lines so often, exercised so much political power... he'd never get past the primaries.

FDR had so many secrets that the press kept quiet... no one would keep his polio quiet today, and we'd have missed him entirely.

:/

just a note tempering all of the loving of FDR (which btw is totally deserved, since he's probably one of the if not THE best president we've had) He also arrested about 2 million US citizens and put them in concentration camps.... executive order 9066 ftl : (

And DURDEN:

Reagan wins MY ASS!

You honestly think Reagan, however great a leader or hated a leade he was, could beat:

-Lincoln, the Great Emancipator, who saved us in The Civil War?
-The Roosevelts, wo basically created 20th Century America, saved capitalism, and became a global force (TR stopping a Russo-Japanese war, FDR entering and winning WWII with Churchill)?
-WASHINGTON, the FATHER OF OUR COUNTRY, so great the CAPITAL was named for him and he was not only offered a crown but then UNANIMOUSLY elected TWICE?

I'd have a hard time Reagan could beat ANY of them- let alone ALL!

Hm, I do like the idea of an in-character Diplomacy game. I just don't feel like I know the presidents well enough to join this one. Are there any other sevensomes that might make for an entertaining game?

(and reagan deregulated the banks which led to this entire mess please don't kill me!)

And yes...

FDR DID have that black mark of the concentration camps...

Terrible.

But all of these greats have a black mark:

-Washington had Shay's Rebellion
-Jefferson had all those slaves...
-Lincoln nearly just left the slaves to their fate
-TR used that "big stick" to be a world-police a bit too often
-Kennedy had the Bay of Pigs (do we count Marilyn Monroe affair as plus or minus?) ;)

haha, true enough.

And REAGAN...

-Iran Contra, Reaganomics was great-then-terrible-now AND started that "spend so much money on the military" spree and actually suggested CUTTING education!

Durden, I'm a Democrat, but I'm willing to concede for all his flaws Regan WAS a good President, DID bring down the Soviets to a good degree.

But if you think for one second that if folks were given a choice of-

HEY!

THERE'S an idea!

OK, folks, new game... see my new thread entitled "Which Of These Presidents Would You Want Today?"

FDR or Teddy, hands down. Third choice would probably be Lincoln, fourth Kennedy. I could take or leave the others.

oops, that's what happens when you don't read through.