Talk:Presidents of the United States Voyage Tips and guide

The dog2 mentioned it in the Trump discussion, but I think it's easier to discuss independently, so to get all of the blurbs up to date, I propose, using the opening from Thedog2's wording (additions in bold):

Joe Biden (D), 2021–present — A former long-serving senator from Delaware and Vice President under Barack Obama. Elected to office amid the COVID-19 pandemic on the promise of a return to normalcy. Concerns over his age and mental faculties led him to bow to pressures to end his reelection bid 4 months prior to the election. His Vice President replaced him as the presidential nominee but ultimately still lost to Trump. As of 2021, the oldest person to assume the office, and will be the oldest person to do so when he leaves office.

Trying to keep the "recency bias" mentioned above in mind, I whittled down the post-Biden part of the election to just who replaced him (his VP) and that the switch out was ultimately still not successful. Previously I had written that he did not seek reelection but realized that that was factually inaccurate, since he went through the entire reelection nomination, so I think it must be said that he ENDED his seek for reelection. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

I oppose spending a lot of time re-writing this before his presidency is over. The above text is contentious, and I don't think we should argue over it now. Ground Zero (talk) 12:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

His presidency is now over, so we should update this. With only slight changes from above, I propose (new text in bold):

"A former long-serving senator from Delaware and Vice President under Barack Obama. Elected to office amid the COVID-19 pandemic on the promise of a return to normalcy. Concerns over his age and mental faculties led him to bow to pressures to end his reelection bid 4 months prior to the election. His Vice President replaced him as nominee but ultimately still lost to Trump. The oldest person to ever serve in the office." ChubbyWimbus (talk) 12:04, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Is his age and the ended run for a second term really the most important things to tell about him? That's what people remember now, but after a year, I suppose what he actually achieved (and the circumstances under which achieving much was difficult) will be seen as more important. Is there nothing to tell about that? –LPfi (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

He and the Federal Reserve saved the country from the likelihood of a depression or deep recession, presided over a term in which there was economic growth and an increase in employment every month, remarkable in comparison to every other country, and got huge public works projects passed, notably including the largest one in U.S. history focused on clean energy infrastructure and conversion from a fossil fuel economy. I don't think Trump will be able to annul all of that, but it's hard to know just how much of what Biden did will survive. So indeed, how should we handle this at this point? Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Also, something travel-relevant is how much park land and otherwise protected land Biden added. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

To answer the question above: Yes, the ending of his bid for reelection is the most important thing to say here. Most presidents serve 8 years, so we don't have to say why they left office, because the answer is simply that they served the maximum time that they could. Any president who serves 4 years (or any amount other than the full 8) should be explained. I agree that it is difficult to say Biden has many accomplishments as we don't know which if any will actually have any long-term affects. I would avoid touting anything about the economy given that the poor economy and lack of faith that Biden could fix it was/is a sentiment felt by the majority of Americans and the refusal of Harris to distance herself from Biden, particularly on the economy, is one of the most commonly stated reasons why she lost. In time, perceptions may change, but I think it would read as very biased to claim that the economy was something he was championed for when it's closer to the opposite.

With that said, some of the other suggestions seem good. If his clean energy bill was the largest in US history, even if it all goes away (or perhaps especially if it goes away), I think that is noteworthy. The largest expansion of park and protected lands is also okay, I think. Taking these factoids, is it better now (new additions in bold):

"A former long-serving senator from Delaware and Vice President under Barack Obama. Elected to office amid the COVID-19 pandemic on the promise of a return to normalcy. Under his presidency, he passed the largest clean energy bill in American history and oversaw the largest expansion of national parks and protected areas by any president. Concerns over his age and mental faculties led him to bow to pressures to end his reelection bid 4 months prior to the election. His Vice President replaced him as nominee but ultimately still lost to Trump. The oldest person to ever serve in the office." ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:22, 23 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

This is fine, IMO. Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:05, 23 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Jimmy Carter just passed away, so he is no longer the oldest living ex-president. That needs to be removed. We should instead say that he is the longest-living president in U.S. history, which is true as of now. And speaking of which, Nixon's blurb has a mistake. All Nixon did was to kickstart rapprochement with communist China because Henry Kissinger saw the Sino-Soviet Split as an opportunity to use China to contain the Soviet Union. It was Jimmy Carter that formally established diplomatic relations with the PRC, so that should be mentioned in Carter's blurb, while Nixon's blurb should corrected to just mentioning his meeting with Mao. The dog2 (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I agree with these proposed changes. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Seeing no objections, I've made these changes. —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

I think we should briefly mention that he met with Mao, since the photos of Nixon with Mao are quite well-known. The dog2 (talk) 19:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Separate note (I agree with the proposed changes), but I recently wrote an article about Plains, which is dedicated almost entirely to sites related to Carter. (There is little else there.) Could we add a "See also" to the top of the Carter section with a link to that article? --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 20:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

We have two listings here for him that seem to be in Plains. If the Jimmy Carter National Historic Site here is identical to the Jimmy Carter National Historic Park there, then I think that linking Plains in also that listing (which now has a link to Classic Heartland of Georgia instead) would be enough and that a see also to a city article could be confusing. –LPfi (talk) 22:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

I've added a mention of Mao as suggested, and I've adjusted the listing in Georgia. Apparently Jimmy Carter National Historic Site was renamed as Jimmy Carter National Historical Park a few years ago. —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Great. Thanks for the input and research. --Comment by Selfie City (talk) (contributions) 20:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

With the yesterday's changes, we now say that Joe Biden is 'the oldest person to ever serve in the office'. I think that's a bit strange, as Trump (unless I am mistaken) is older now than what Biden was when assuming the office (born in June and November respectively), and if something unexpected doesn't happen, he will be older than Biden at the end of his term. If we mention the age, we probably should mention also the age of Trump or restore the 'when he leave [left] office' –LPfi (talk) 08:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Do we even need to mention that? I don't see how that is relevant to travellers. --SHB (t | c | m) 08:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

What kinds of things do you think are? I thought the idea was to summarize the best-known facts about each president, but if you can think of a way to make all the blurbs more travel-relevant, do tell. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:09, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

I think most of the blurbs are fine, but for something like oldest president, it changes and in this case, needlessly nuanced to mention. --SHB (t | c | m) 09:59, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

It's certainly something Biden was known for. But we should wait for all the, um, events of the second Trump term before editing the blurb for him further. If he invades Greenland, we should probably add that...Also, it should be needless to say, but we shouldn't assume he will serve till the end of the term. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

I 100% agree with you. --SHB (t | c | m) 10:36, 22 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

As of now, it's true that he's the oldest person to serve in the office. But I'm fine removing it for now. And yes, if Trump invades Panama and Greenland and annexes Canada, that should go in his blurb, but that hasn't happened yet. It is also possible that Trump is just using this threat as a negotiating technique to arm twist Panama and Denmark into blocking China from using the Panama Canal and the Arctic passage for shipping. The dog2 (talk) 04:49, 23 January 2025 (UTC)Reply