Ranking the Presidents
15 Mar 2007, 8:40 pm
Feel free to differ on the particulars.
GREAT
1. George Washington (-)
2. Abraham Lincoln (-)
NEAR GREAT
3. Thomas Jefferson (+1)
4. Ronald Reagan (-1) [still early]
5. Dwight D. Eisenhower (+1)
6. Harry S. Truman (+1)
7. James Polk (+1)
8. William McKinley (+2)
ABOVE AVERAGE
9. Grover Cleveland (+6)
10. Theodore Roosevelt (-5)
11. Franklin D. Roosevelt (-)
12. Andrew Jackson (-3)
13. Calvin Coolidge (-)
14. George H.W. Bush (-2) [still early]
15. John Adams [+10]
16. James Monroe [-2]
AVERAGE
17. William Howard Taft [-]
18. James Madison [+3]
19. Woodrow Wilson [-3]
20. John F. Kennedy [-2]
21. Chester A. Arthur [-2]
22. Gerald R. Ford [-1]
23. Ulysses S. Grant [+8]
24. Martin Van Buren [-]
25. Rutherford B. Hayes [-3]
26. John Quincy Adams [-2]
27. Warren G. Harding [+6]
BELOW AVERAGE
28. Bill Clinton [-1] [still early]
29. Benjamin Harrison [-1]
30. Millard Fillmore [-1]
31. Zachary Taylor [+3]
32. John Tyler [-2]
33. Richard Nixon [-7]
34. Lyndon B. Johnson [-2]
FAILURE
35. Andrew Johnson [-]
36. Jimmy Carter [-]
37. James Buchanan [+2]
38. Herbert Hoover [-1]
39. Franklin Pierce [-1]
Previous list.
Right now Bush could wind up anywhere from near great to below average based on how things are going. He would really have to screw up to be deemed a total failure, although it's not impossible. He has dropped since I last did it.
This isn't really based on whether or not I would have agreed with the President at the time but more on the long term impact of the President. I consider Andrew Jackson, and James Polk to be presidents of questionable character (the former involved in the most brazingly illegal action by a President in American history), however ultimately they wind up higher because of their effect on the history of the nation. The same with Theodore Roosevelt (although that is not so much a question of character). I think many of his economic policies (like Truman) were ill-conceived , however the image he projected (as well as his foreign policy) were important to rehabilitating the power of the office after Johnson-congress confrontation (although McKinley does not get nearly the credit he deserves in this). His foreign policy was also vital to establishing American foreign policy, although he was more aggressive in this regard then his predecessor or his successor.
The rank changes and from went I did then in 2004, although I think I might have done them again since them on this forum.
I admit I am subjective. Warren Harding is not listed among the failures, nor is Ulysses S. Grant. FDR is not at the top, but Ronald Reagan, at least at this early stage, is. This has nothing to do with party however. You will see Richard Nixon lower then he is customarily being ranked in recent times. My opinion of him is complex, which is appropriate for the complex (and brilliant) man that he was. However, my ultimate appraisal of his presidency cannot be denied.
TheMachine1
Veteran
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,092
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.
15 Mar 2007, 9:34 pm
1. Abraham Lincoln : held the country together and ended slavery
2. Theodore Roosevelt : took on big business and promoted conservation
3. Franklin D. Roosevelt: gave the country hope in a hard time
4. Harry S. Truman: gave the order to drop the bombs and ended the war(yes I Knew people who fought the Japanese in the jungles of Philippines and value their lives more
than 200,000 civilians feeding a war machine)
5. Ronald Reagan : Defeated communism
6. John F. Kennedy: promoted civil rights
15 Mar 2007, 9:54 pm
just so that we're clear on this point, reagan did jack s**t to beat communism. communism fell under it's own bloated inefficient doomed weight.
carter actually was one of the better presidents, the only problem is that he was ahead of his time and didn't have congress backing him.
bush, on the other hand....we've seen more terrorism, economic plight, constitutional violations, and come the closest to fascism we have ever come under his terms in office....i would be more than happy to kill george walker bush with my own hands if i could get away with it.
TheMachine1
Veteran
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,092
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.
15 Mar 2007, 10:13 pm
just so that we're clear on this point, Reagan did jack s**t to beat communism. communism fell under it's own bloated inefficient doomed weight.
I think his major defence build up made the Warsaw pack spend alot more money than
they comfortable could. Many viewed Reagan as pro-nuclear and promoting SDI gave
real concern that the US was building a first strike capability. The best way for the USSR to counter SDI was to build alot more missiles. Then the USSR's own war in Afghanistan was a massive drain on resources and the US armed everybody including Bin Laden in that war.
15 Mar 2007, 10:22 pm
just so that we're clear on this point, Reagan did jack s**t to beat communism. communism fell under it's own bloated inefficient doomed weight.
I think his major defence build up made the Warsaw pack spend alot more money than
they comfortable could. Many viewed Reagan as pro-nuclear and promoting SDI gave
real concern that the US was building a first strike capability. The best way for the USSR to counter SDI was to build alot more missiles. Then the USSR's own war in Afghanistan was a massive drain on resources and the US armed everybody including Bin Laden in that war.
carter can be blamed for our genius actions in afghanistan....oh wait...reagan finished that one off, carter just started it.
just like carter was the one who got the hostages freed from iran.
15 Mar 2007, 10:32 pm
GREAT
1. George Washington (-)
2. Abraham Lincoln (-)
NEAR GREAT
3. Thomas Jefferson (+1)
4. Ronald Reagan (-1) [still early]
5. Dwight D. Eisenhower (+1)
6. Harry S. Truman (+1)
7. James Polk (+1)
8. William McKinley (+2)
ABOVE AVERAGE
9. Grover Cleveland (+6)
10. Theodore Roosevelt (-5)
11. Franklin D. Roosevelt (-)
12. Andrew Jackson (-3)
13. Calvin Coolidge (-)
14. George H.W. Bush (-2) [still early]
15. John Adams [+10]
16. James Monroe [-2]
AVERAGE
17. William Howard Taft [-]
18. James Madison [+3]
19. Woodrow Wilson [-3]
20. John F. Kennedy [-2]
21. Chester A. Arthur [-2]
22. Gerald R. Ford [-1]
23. Ulysses S. Grant [+8]
24. Martin Van Buren [-]
25. Rutherford B. Hayes [-3]
26. John Quincy Adams [-2]
27. Warren G. Harding [+6]
BELOW AVERAGE
28. Bill Clinton [-1] [still early]
29. Benjamin Harrison [-1]
30. Millard Fillmore [-1]
31. Zachary Taylor [+3]
32. John Tyler [-2]
33. Richard Nixon [-7]
34. Lyndon B. Johnson [-2]
FAILURE
35. Andrew Johnson [-]
36. Jimmy Carter [-]
37. James Buchanan [+2]
38. Herbert Hoover [-1]
39. Franklin Pierce [-1]
Previous list.
Right now Bush could wind up anywhere from near great to below average based on how things are going. He would really have to screw up to be deemed a total failure, although it's not impossible. He has dropped since I last did it.
This isn't really based on whether or not I would have agreed with the President at the time but more on the long term impact of the President. I consider Andrew Jackson, and James Polk to be presidents of questionable character (the former involved in the most brazingly illegal action by a President in American history), however ultimately they wind up higher because of their effect on the history of the nation. The same with Theodore Roosevelt (although that is not so much a question of character). I think many of his economic policies (like Truman) were ill-conceived , however the image he projected (as well as his foreign policy) were important to rehabilitating the power of the office after Johnson-congress confrontation (although McKinley does not get nearly the credit he deserves in this). His foreign policy was also vital to establishing American foreign policy, although he was more aggressive in this regard then his predecessor or his successor.
The rank changes and from went I did then in 2004, although I think I might have done them again since them on this forum.
I admit I am subjective. Warren Harding is not listed among the failures, nor is Ulysses S. Grant. FDR is not at the top, but Ronald Reagan, at least at this early stage, is. This has nothing to do with party however. You will see Richard Nixon lower then he is customarily being ranked in recent times. My opinion of him is complex, which is appropriate for the complex (and brilliant) man that he was. However, my ultimate appraisal of his presidency cannot be denied.
This sums what exactly my opinion of them is.
TheMachine1
Veteran
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,092
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.
15 Mar 2007, 10:46 pm
just so that we're clear on this point, Reagan did jack s**t to beat communism. communism fell under it's own bloated inefficient doomed weight.
I think his major defence build up made the Warsaw pack spend alot more money than
they comfortable could. Many viewed Reagan as pro-nuclear and promoting SDI gave
real concern that the US was building a first strike capability. The best way for the USSR to counter SDI was to build alot more missiles. Then the USSR's own war in Afghanistan was a massive drain on resources and the US armed everybody including Bin Laden in that war.
carter can be blamed for our genius actions in Afghanistan....oh wait...Reagan finished that one off, carter just started it.
I think someone close to Carter said we would have been at def-con 1 if the USSR invade Iran after Afghanistan.
Carter got a bad rap because so much crap went wrong in the world when he was in office. But the reason he can not be on the great list of presidents is because he did not
deal with any of it very good. History likes winners.
15 Mar 2007, 10:55 pm
One of the most controversial moves of President Carter's presidency was the final negotiation and signature of the Panama Canal Treaties in September 1977. Those treaties, which essentially would transfer control of the American-built Panama Canal to the nation of Panama, were bitterly opposed by a segment of the American public and by the Republican Party. A common argument against the treaties was that the United States was transferring an American asset of great strategic value to an unstable and corrupt country led by a brutal military dictator (Omar Torrijos). After the signature of the Canal treaties, in June 1978, Jimmy Carter visited Panama with his wife and twelve U.S. Senators, amid widespread student disturbances against the Torrijos dictatorship. Carter then began urging the Torrijos regime to soften its policies and move Panama towards gradual democratization. This treaty ultimately helped relations with Panama and Latin America.
you're thinking of nixon who helped china move out of being a crap country into being an economic threat to us that they now are.
then again, carter continued nixon's policies for normalization of china.
seriously...carter is one of the most underrated presidents just because he had to deal with the economic and political fallout from nixon and ford. ford's greatest move was to pardon those who dodged the draft...he also pardoned nixon to end the whole affair and get the country focusing on moving forward....other than that, ford didn't do much....carter accomplished a lot in his time....just policies and plans were ahead of the time.
15 Mar 2007, 11:33 pm
Reagan was mediocre. The Economy was in a recession throughout the 80s. "Defeating Communism" ? What is this, the McCarthy era?
I'd vote Clinton as Above Average or Near Great. The Economy throughout his rule was excellent. We were heading towards a utopian society and had the largest surplus in American history (until the next guy came along)...
Bush belongs under "Failure." Do I even need to touch THAT one?
FDR Belongs under "Great." He was there for this country during the Great Depression and WWII.
George Bush Sr. deserves "Average" at best.
There's my two cents.
16 Mar 2007, 8:27 am
This is true, circumstances are important. It's not an exact science and in many ways is unfair. Who knows what Franklin Pierce would have done if he hadn't watched his son get killed in front of his eyes by a train? I doubt he would be a great president, but he probably wouldn't have been a drunk either.
Herbert Hoover was a truly brilliant, generous hero of a man. It's too bad he ran for President though, it destroyed his reputation (although he is unfairly attacked for his handling of the "Bonus Marchers," he was left with little choice there). Hoover incidentally in the more traditional histories in the sort of Coolidge mold, but he was much more of a "progressive" type (time is causing a correction in this regard). Many of his policies, which FDR campaigned against, were then adapted by him in a supercharged way (Hoover always disliked FDR because of this).
I have sympathy for Nixon. His immediate predecessors (as well as the iconic FDR) did some of the very things that forced him out, yet they are not scolded over it. He was caught off guard, although someone of his intelligence should have been smarter to detect the change in media and political atmosphere. I rank Nixon lowly do to poor domestic, and economic policies that had harmful effects on the country. Had he been better at covering up his petty scandals or avoiding them all together, he may had done better in foreign policy. As it was instead of holding South Vietnam, he resigned, congress went overwhelmed to the Democrats, and South Vietnam was cut off and fell to the Communists (followed by Cambodia). Nixon did "go the China," although apparently the effects were less immediate then previously indicated (see The Unknown Mao by Chang and Halliday. However, I am less pessimistic then they are. While his efforts to cut off funds in for the Vietnamese communists proved unable to prevent them from ultimately victory, he did in the long term (beyond his Presidency, and Mao's death) apparently help cement the continuing Sino-Soviet split by providing an clear outlet for trade for the Chinese in the West.
There is a new book out about Eisenhower entitled Ike's Final Battle about Eisenhower and civil rights. I browsed some of it in a bookstore and it was fascinating. Eisenhower actually was rather conservative, more conservative then he is typically portrayed, but he was also pragmatic. You can see this in his failure to take on many New Deal policies, which he actually thought to be rather foolish.
Carter was a terrible manager. Reagan got along better with the Democratic congress then Carter did, and that says allot.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Name Two Presidents |
07 Aug 2008, 3:38 pm |
| Asperger Presidents? |
19 Jan 2008, 7:54 pm |
| Interesting ex US Presidents? |
28 Jun 2010, 2:09 am |
| Pew; Christian Presidents |
31 May 2014, 10:13 pm |
