Greatest Presidents and Worst Presidents

I will nominate Theodore Roosevelt as our most amazing President. No President was more accomplished as a person and few come close to his positive accomplishments.

Of course George Washington gets huge points for being first but more importantly being willing to step down and not becoming another petty military dictator. Not even a charismatic and beloved one. He did so much to forge this country and give it a good start.

Abraham Lincoln of course is overrated but only as he is lauded and worshiped beyond his accomplishment. The North had huge advantages in the fight and Lincoln while a great man took a long time to find the right Generals to fight the war and was slow to marshal the advantages of the northern industrial machine and chose not to foment rebellion among the slaves. Now all that said, not many Presidents get to prove their worth by holding the country together despite terrible Generals and unrest from the poor rightfully not liking a system where the rich just bought themselves out of the draft. He was a great President that rose to the occasion but I do not feel he is the equal of Theodore or Washington.


Worst Presidents are tricky.

George W. Bush appears to be among the worst but at this point I still have to give the nod to …
James Buchanan was terrible. He was a poor compromise candidate and a terrible President that if anything accelerated the civil war.
I will allow his own words to convict him:

Quote:

---

The course of events is so rapidly hastening forward that the emergency may soon arise when you may be called upon to decide the momentous question whether you possess the power by force of arms to compel a State to remain in the Union. I should feel myself recreant to my duty were I not to express an opinion on this important subject.
The question fairly stated is, Has the Constitution delegated to Congress the power to coerce a State into submission which is attempting to withdraw or has actually withdrawn from the Confederacy? If answered in the affirmative, it must be on the principle that the power has been conferred upon Congress to declare and to make war against a State. After much serious reflection I have arrived at the conclusion that no such power has been delegated to Congress or to any other department of the Federal Government. It is manifest upon an inspection of the Constitution that this is not among the specific and enumerated powers granted to Congress, and it is equally apparent that its exercise is not "necessary and proper for carrying into execution" any one of these powers. So far from this power having been delegated to Congress, it was expressly refused by the Convention which framed the Constitution.

---

Speech before Congress (3 December 1860)

That’s right; he saw no right to hold the country together. Any State was free to leave.

Warren G. Harding is my other candidate for worst three. He was the original George W. Bush. He appointed his cronies and got a thoroughly corrupt administration. Most famous is the Teapot Dome affair but that was only the biggest scandal. Harding was also another compromise candidate like Buchanan.

Both Nixon and Carter need to be considered. Nixon was a nasty, scheming asshole of a man but he did much good. Carter is a wonderful man but did little that succeeded or helped the country and seemed completely ineffective at the job.

Wow, that Buchanan quote is brutal. If the guy had had any less backbone, you could have killed him by pouring salt on him.

I definitely agree about Theodore Roosevelt. He was an incredibly admirable president. Perhaps not perfect in the role, but no one ever can be.

I think that George W. Bush is pretty far up there, but I'd want to give it a full term or two after him before making the claim that he was the worst of all. The wounds are still open in his case and might be making him appear worse than he truly was.

Buchanan was bad, but he wasn't alone. The years leading up the Civil War were hardly full of particularly exemplary examples of leadership.

John Tyler (1841-1845) made it into the White House by riding the Whig Party in with William Harrison and then immediately turned around and opposed everything that party stood for. One famous quote said he was guilty of reviving "the condemned and repudiated doctrines and practices of the worst days of Jackson's rule." His "championship" of state's rights over the well-being of the union and support of slavery helped set the stage for the Civil War.

Millard Fillmore (1850-1853) worked hard for compromises to keep the Civil War at bay, but those compromises ended up making the situation worse in the end. Had he faced them directly instead of trying to placate people--such as supporting the Fugitive Slave Law, which compelled the federal government to return fugitive slaves to their masters--it may have been brought to some sort of resolution earlier. Delaying war is not the same as averting it.

And then we have Franklin Pierce (1853-1857), who so wanted to expand the country that he ensured we'd have more and more slave states to do it. At one point he even wanted to annex Cuba and possibly turn that into another slave state as well. Theodore Roosevelt himself said that Pierce was "a servile tool of men worse than himself ... ever ready to do any work the slavery leaders set him."

Ulysses Grant, President from 1869-1877. Personally an admirable man, I think. But as President he ranged from less effective than one might prefer, to downright disastrous. He had no sense for subordinates, or associates, and so his administration became known for scandal and corruption. Nothing I've read actually linked Grant with the corruption, but he was unable, or unwilling, to believe the worst of his associates. Then there's the end of Reconstruction... and the election of the other President I'll nominate to the list. When Grant realized just how little support there was to continue Reconstruction, he allowed a number of Reconstruction governments to fall to thugs and bullies.

Rutherfraud Hayes 1877-1881, who was willing to promise to end Reconstruction to get elected in, perhaps, the most egregious example of a theft of the Presidency happening in the Electoral College. Forget Bush and Gore, the election of 1876 is the best argument I can think of to end that body's existence. While he did try to clean up the civil service, I can't forget that he ushered in the era of Jim Crow.

Teddy wasn't a great president by any stretch of the imagination. He was the first of the progressive socialists that have been damaging our country ever since.

The best, IMNSHO, is a tie between Washington, John Adams and Lincoln. The worst is a tie betwen Buchanan, Pierce and Carter, with Obama making a strong charge to join the group.

I'm a political and historical moron. Would you guys mind explaining to me a) why some of you worship Teddy Roosevelt and b) why Clothahump calls him a progressive socialist?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Nrblex

I'm a political and historical moron. Would you guys mind explaining to me a) why some of you worship Teddy Roosevelt and b) why Clothahump calls him a progressive socialist?

---

Well Roosevelt was an odd mix of Pro-Business but Anti-trust. Self Determination but using the government to correct things that were wrong. Back before this country had any health insurance to speak of he had a platform that included serious health care reform. As you can see from Clothahump's inclusion of a 1 year President for consideration, he is very anti-socialist programs and Theodore did start many things that some would consider limited socialism. Also as the first conservationist President he tends to lose some favor from hard-line anti-greens. Hawks like Theodore as he was a huge proponent of a strong military and expansion but thus isolationists dislike as do pacifists.

Really big business did not like him. But he was a very good friend to small and medium business and competition.

He pushed for and signed into law clean food acts, national parks and better working conditions. He was clearly not pro-union but he was not anti-union enough for part of the right wing of the Republican party. They never trust and trust buster and he was a trust buster.

As to why some of us seem to worship him, no President has ever been like him. He was more rugged than Washington and at least as much of a scholar as Jefferson or Wilson. He was not only a Harvard schooled genius, but a successful writer with several books being critically received to become the standard textbook for years on the subject. He naturalist pursuits were considered exceptionally well done. His years in the badlands of the Dakotas read like tall tales but are all true. He was shot on the campaign trail in the chest and gave a 45 minute speech while bleeding before seeking medical attention.

The Great Hawk that put us on the World Stage with the Great White Fleet was also the Nobel Prize winning diplomat that ended the Russo-Japanese War. BTW, that was the first US President to win the Nobel. He was as strong a proponent of a powerful and well equipped Navy as any President ever was. I would rate only John Adams and Reagan up there with him. He was the first President to fly in an airplane and did so when most would consider them extremely dangerous experimental vehicles. I believe but would have to verify he was also the first in a sub.

He invited the first black man to dinner at the White House and took a firestorm of complaints for it. He was strongly in favor of complete suffrage for all.

He may have been the most moral man to ever rise to President unless it was Washington or Adams. Despite this he was not in favor of prohibition despite being almost a complete abstainer himself. Whether charging up San Juan Hill in Cuba on foot or leading a sheriff’s party in the Dakota in a freezing January winter to pursue 3 dangerous criminals he always took the lead himself.

He was one of the greatest hunters and yet did much to start preserving animals. A very odd conflict by today’s standards unless you know the respect and love many hunters has for their prey.

I can go on but should probably stop now.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Clothahump

...The best, IMNSHO, is a tie between Washington, John Adams and Lincoln....

---

John Adams's greatest contributions to his country were as a member of the Continental Congress, long before he became President. He was grumpy and ineffectual as President, and his backing of the Alien and Sedition Acts - a direct assault on the First Amendment - alone removes him from any possibility of being considered one of the best chief executives.

In my top five I'd put Washington, Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman and maybe JFK. Jackson and Polk would be in the running for sheer effectiveness, if their policies weren't so awful (Indian removal and the Mexican War, respectively). FDR was too slippery and dishonest for me to really get behind him, although his Great Depression and WW2 leadership was certainly invaluable. Grover Cleveland's honesty and solid work ethic raises him in my estimation, too.

In my bottom five I'd put Buchanan, Pierce, Grant, Harding and Nixon. All terrible Presidents, but for very different reasons. George W. Bush might very well displace one of them eventually, but I agree with Zuul that we need more time to be sure.

This elimination contest might interest you: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=533286

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Elendil's Heir

John Adams's greatest contributions to his country were as a member of the Continental Congress, long before he became President. He was grumpy and ineffectual as President, and his backing of the Alien and Sedition Acts - a direct assault on the First Amendment - alone removes him from any possibility of being considered one of the best chief executives.

In my top five I'd put Washington, Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman and maybe JFK. Jackson and Polk would be in the running for sheer effectiveness, if their policies weren't so awful (Indian removal and the Mexican War, respectively). FDR was too slippery and dishonest for me to really get behind him, although his Great Depression and WW2 leadership was certainly invaluable. Grover Cleveland's honesty and solid work ethic raises him in my estimation, too.

In my bottom five I'd put Buchanan, Pierce, Grant, Harding and Nixon. All terrible Presidents, but for very different reasons. George W. Bush might very well displace one of them eventually, but I agree with Zuul that we need more time to be sure.

This elimination contest might interest you: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=533286

---

Could you expand on Truman. The rest I understand and in all but one case I agree with. I do not know enough about Truman honestly and have some kneejerk issues with him.

Harry Truman came into office when FDR died in 1945, in the last days of WW2, and was immediately thought suspect by many because he came from the crooked Pendergast Machine of Kansas City, Mo. He'd done some good work as a U.S. senator fighting military procurement fraud but was largely unknown. People thought he was at best a hack, at worst a crook, and doubted he could measure up to FDR.

But Truman more than rose to the occasion, making tough - and I believe correct - calls on dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, establishing the UN, NATO and the CIA, diplomatically recognizing Israel, desegregating the U.S. military, containing the USSR, launching the Marshall Plan, approving the Berlin Airlift, and responding to North Korean aggression. He fired Douglas MacArthur when the general repeatedly challenged his authority, firmly asserting civilian control over the military but paying a big political price for doing so.

The Democratic Party split three ways in 1948 and he was widely expected to lose, but he still managed to win election in his own right. He survived an assassination attempt by Puerto Rican separatists and that very afternoon went to speak at Arlington National Cemetery as scheduled. He made our alliance with Great Britain even stronger, befriending Churchill, who initially was wary of him after having had such a close working relationship with FDR. He welcomed back Herbert Hoover to the White House, making it a point to show respect to a former President who had been shunned throughout FDR's administration. He also made his own Vice President an integral part of his administration, perhaps reacting to FDR's keeping him in the dark while he'd briefly held the job.

Truman was smart, plain-spoken, friendly, honest, forthright, loved history, and enjoyed the Presidency almost as much as T.R., but when he retired he confessed that it was a relief to go back to being just plain old "Mr. Truman."

I wholeheartedly recommend David McCullough's book Truman as a readable, fascinating, well-researched account of the man.

I also think that Truman deserves major props for reining in MacArthur, who was busily building what amounted to his own private American Empire in the Far East. Not to mention the way that MacArthur's public comments were serving to pour gasoline on the Korean conflict.

Thanks for the answer on Truman Elendil's Heir. I have a mostly simplified view of him as the man that gave away Eastern Europe to the Soviets and abandoned Poland especially to them. I felt he mishandled Korea except for ousting MacArthur.

I will have to read up on him and will add Truman to my reading list. I love McCullough anyway so that is a win-win.

I also agree the atomic bombs were the very tough and correct decision to make and of course the Marshall Plan, the rebuilding of Japan and desegregating the U.S. military.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Clothahump

Teddy wasn't a great president by any stretch of the imagination. He was the first of the progressive socialists that have been damaging our country ever since.

The best, IMNSHO, is a tie between Washington, John Adams and Lincoln. The worst is a tie betwen Buchanan, Pierce and Carter, with Obama making a strong charge to join the group.

---

Clothahump, who do you think was the best president of the 20th century?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by What Exit?

Thanks for the answer on Truman Elendil's Heir. I have a mostly simplified view of him as the man that gave away Eastern Europe to the Soviets and abandoned Poland especially to them. I felt he mishandled Korea except for ousting MacArthur....

---

The Soviets already occupied all of Poland and most of Eastern Europe by the time Truman took the oath of office. Short of starting World War II Phase II, there wasn't much he could do about it, and in adopting the Kennan proposal for containment, Truman actually took a tougher line on the Soviets than most historians think FDR would have, had he lived. Hell, I remember several of my college history profs who blamed Truman for starting the Cold War, discounting Stalin's own aggressiveness and the need to confront him before he rolled over Western Europe. Truman did the best he could under the circumstances.

Now, he certainly made several mistakes during the Korean War. With the benefit of hindsight, a declaration of war against North Korea (rather than designating the conflict a neither-fish-nor-fowl "police action") and a more general U.S. mobilization would probably have been a better approach. But Truman insisted on confronting North Korean aggression while being careful of triggering WW3, and ultimately made possible the peaceful, prosperous South Korea which is such a good friend of ours to this day.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Nrblex

I'm a political and historical moron. Would you guys mind explaining to me a) why some of you worship Teddy Roosevelt and b) why Clothahump calls him a progressive socialist?

---

Read this book: Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg. I'm only about halfway through it, but so far, it has scared me tremendously to learn how people we think of as good Presidents have undermined the Constitution so badly.

Quote:

---

Many believed, including Wilson, that they had found just such a figure in Theodore Roosevelt. Moe than a popular leader, he was the designated idol of a true leadership cult.
...
Roosevelt was the first to translate "L'etat, c'est moi" into the American argot, often claiming that the nation's sovereignty was indistinguishable from his own august personage. As president, he regularly exceeded the bounds of his traditional and legal powers, doing his will first and waiting (or not) for the courts and the legislatures to catch up.

This captures in small relief the basic difference between Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt, bitter rivals and the only two proudly progressive presidents of the Progressive Era. These were very different men with very similar ideas.
...
While Wilson wrote treatises explaining why Americans should abandon their "blind devotion" to the Constitution, Teddy was rough-riding all over the document, doing what he pleased and giving bellicose speeches about how the courts had sided against "popular rights" and were "lagging behind" the new realities.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OneCentStamp

Clothahump, who do you think was the best president of the 20th century?

---

I like Ike. Also Reagan and Bush 41. But probably the most under-rated president, IMNSHO, was Ford. He got dumped into a bad situation, one that could have really damaged the country. He stepped up, took control of it and fixed it, and for his actions, he was savaged irresponsibly.

I agree about Ford, Clothahump. I think he did the best that he could in the situation, but that was not an easy situation to be thrust into.

Bump

http://www.solarnavigator.net/geogra...ant_africa.jpg

Not knowing my American Presidents, who is that?

That looks like good ole' Theodore Roosevelt. I don't recall what trip he was on that he shot an Elephant though. I believe it was post Presidency though as he never went near elephant territory that I know of earlier in life. His prior trip to Africa was down the Nile.