>dies in pain from throat cancer alone with no money>supposedly a great hero that everybody revered >wikipedia even says that to suggest he wasn't popular is revisionist despite him having one of the most openly corrupt presidents in US history
>>17981442What is the point of this thread? You read a Wikipedia article while stoned?
>>17981449Do you not think it's odd that to this day we're damage controlling for a president nobody even knows exists?
>>17981450Do you regularly get into conversations about Ulysses Grant in your life?
>>17981454No? which is exactly my point, why would anybody care if people knew he was a corrupt loser
>>17981454Only at family gatherings
>>17981460Generals don't make good presidents. Eisenhower was a dud too. Regardless, he was briefly popular enough to become President after the civil war. Legacies ebb and flow.
>>17981473He was popular because he was a yes-man for the political establishment, a corrupt yes man that filled his administration with his entire family He wasn't actually popular
>>17981479Impressive that you time traveled from 1871 just to air out your grievances on a dead imageboard
>>17981484This is a history board you moron
>>17981510>I HATE ULYSSES GRANT! I HATE ULYSSES GRANT! THAT TWO-TIMING RAT FINK!Riveting historical analysis
>>17981515>know grant died cold and alone from cancer with no money>look up grant>go to wiki page (the first thing everybody sees)>see this>Grant was the most popular American... Due to the pseudohistorical and negationist mythology of the Lost Cause of the Confederacy spread by Confederate sympathizers around the turn of the 20th century, historical assessments and rankings of Grant's presidency suffered considerably before they began recovering in the 21st century. Grant's critics take a negative view of his economic mismanagement and the corruption within his administration...
>>17981520Wikipedia is essentially 4chan for academics. You're getting mad as hell over what some 22 year old wrote in 2007 or something.
>>17981522Through the power of the internet I can see it was written in the last yearHere's what it said january >Historical assessments once ranked Grant as one of the worst presidents in American history. However, revisionist challenges to this narrative have received significant support in recent times. Although critical of the scandals, modern historians have emphasized his presidential administration's accomplishments
>>17981528no that was january 2023, they changed it to "lost cause revisionism" within the last yearseems there's been a huge struggle with grant's wiki page with it being edited to portray him as the best president ever
He wrote his autobiography while dying in order to save his family from poverty and it became a best seller thanks to some promotion by Mark Twain plus using Union vets as door to door book salesmen. It’s quite well written with the kind of blunt concise prose you’d expect from Grant, and despite him not being an intellectual, it’s some of the best writing by any president and should be on the shelf of any Civil War fan. He focuses on the Mexican War and ACW and whatever you think of Grant it’s less self serving than most war memoirs.
>>17981612Grant had arguably the best memoirs of any of the major figures of the ACW and his are almost the only ones still read today>concise prose you’d expect from Grant, and His wife helped co-author/edit it AFAIK.
>>17981442Fuck the united states of satan, unify my dick with your mouth yankees, i won't be reconstructed.
>>17981515More riveting than your yankee bullshit.
he was popular because he killed dixoids, but that's about it
>>17981612Probably because it was heavily edited by the man that wanted to make a quick buck off of a dying president
>>17981473>Generals don't make good presidentsGeorge Washington and Andrew Jackson were both great
>Grant freely acknowledged that he thought partisan politics had no place in what was a war to save the country; he felt the country belonged to Democrats as much as it did Republicans and both sides should come together for the common cause. He respected all of his old army colleagues and regretted when the services of a West Pointer were lost due to political disagreements. To that end, Grant would have liked to extend the olive branch to outcasts such as Buell and McClellan if possible.>He added that political handicaps were usually self-imposed. "Those officers who devised new theories of state governments, emancipation proclamations, and invading Canada came to grief almost as surely as the officers who believed the war's primary aim was to safeguard Rebel property and keep the Negros working in the fields while their owners were off fighting in the rebellion."
>>17981640>posted from my Obamaphone
>>17981442>>17981809Grant didn't throw a temper tantrum when he didn't get his way 100% unlike McCuck, he accepted the hand he was dealt with, even if it included following retarded War Department edicts or having to retain Ben Butler as a general.
>>17981612Reminder that this all happened because Rosecrans was a turbo faggot who used his political leverage to deny Grant a pension after he left the White House.
>>17981818>posted from my Huawei
>>17981796jackson was shit. And George was fine. His most important contribution was the peaceful handover of power, while he still could have retained it even by election.
>>17981761Twain was one of the few people who tried to help him and his family in any meaningful way. This secured the family estate and more when his death was certain and things seemed on the brink. Grant's own decisions politically and financially put him in that position to begin with. The whole effort of the autobiography was heroic and you are a fag for this post.
>>17981479he was popular because he won the civil war for the Union, retardit didn't have much to do with his actions as president (good or bad)
>>17982398>super popular because of the war>becomes president>is the most corrupt president ever besides lincoln >like incompetently corrupt >entire lincoln government outed as fraudsters while your family tries to corner the gold market >jews showing up in your war camp asking to bribe you for war loot, introduced by your dad
>>17981450>we're damage controlling for a president nobody even knows existsYou're right. US Grant is never talked about, and is in no way an extremely prominent figure in American history
>>17982438I've found with the big lies they present details matter-of-fact so that you don't really think about the implications. History is written for stupid people to come to stupid conclusions
>>17982396Imagine a man crippled in some shack with a huge lump out the side of his neck, can't swallow without pissing himself. Hoping to get a few pennies for his wife after he dies. And tell me anybody cared about that man
>Sir! You can't promote Grant, he's an infamous drunk!>What's his brand?>I'll send a case to my other generals.
>>17982602I was almost going to say it's almost a shame Lincoln didn't get his but then I remembered
>>17982618Break a leg, anon
>>17981450He's one of the most mentioned figures in the entire war you dumb idiot
>>17981449>>17981454you are coping because you see Grant as a necessary element in ideological opposition to the South because the South is le racist.You can oppose The South, you can even oppose Racism, without backing US Grant.Grant openly sold out the US cavalry to private companies for clearing indians out of gold rich regions of the Dakotas.this is obviously something no one today should be okay with, yet because Grant opposed racism, we are okay with it?
>>17982641This is why basing historical knowledge on battles is stupid. Nobody gives a shit about who the union general was during some clusterfuck like the civil war, the fact that grant is basically the only person other than lee and lincoln remembered from the civil war should tell you something. Maybe, possibly, somebody can glean a piece of a general's psyche through the familiarity of their combat, but what's that little nugget to everybody else.What's his tax policies?
>>17982701You forgot Sherman and Stonewall
>>17981449He's a faggot neo-confederate.Grant is one of the best generals the US had but an overall poor president even if fucking up the KKK is based.
>>17981796Andrew Jackson>backstabbed the injuns>retarded economic policies turned the country into an economic dumpster fire that was only abated with the gold rush and even then panics and recessions were a common thing until the implementation of the Federal Reserve
I can't imagine anything more pathetic than being a neo-confederate. At least Nazis were successful for a while so wehraboos have something to back them up. The Confederates were losers to a man whose vaunted military skill vanished when up against someone of even slightly above average military skill.
>>17981449I know I've made my fair share of threads like this, although usually its a real history site
>>17982683>You can oppose The South, you can even oppose Racism, without backing US Grant.Not consistently, since he was Lincoln's perfect disciple. Lincoln's invasion was waged as much on the behalf of business interests as any U.S. adventure in a banana republic ever was. Grant's administration was the logical conclusion of destroying half the country for the sole purpose of collecting corporate welfare. We know this because he said as much in his inaugural address, that he could not legally touch slavery, but he could invade a state to collect revenue.
>>17981442His presidency was controversial, but he was always beloved as a person.>Why'd he die brokeHe was really bad with money, made a plethora of bad investments.
>>17983082Why are you so obsessed with backing losers?
>>17983009Reminder Jackson was a high profile elite that people elected because he stood for "the common man" and the only reason he did was because he lost money speculating
>>17982459Mark Twain very obviously did and saw to his reputation and family. The autobiography getting completed improved Grant's legacy all the more and not just in the short term. I'm not quite sure why you would view Mark Twain as a bad actor here, rather than the people who actually destroyed Grant politically and financially. Even Grant himself, for the decisions he made. Would it have been better for Grant to receive some charity and never have produced the memoir?
>>17984342Twain also supported William Jennings Bryan along with Carnegie to try and prevent the republicans from creating the american empire
>>17981442>>17981450>>17981460>>17981479>>17981510>>17981520>>17981528>>17981761>>17982459Do the board a favor, and wash your mouth out with buckshot
