Presidential Rankings

[dazzleman]

I think LBJ was great on civil rights, but terrible on everything else, so it's hard to think of him as a "great" president.  LBJ and Nixon are the most conflicted modern presidents, with great strengths and ruinous weaknesses.

As far as Lincoln goes, I'm sure he didn't believe that blacks were equal to whites, but few people, if anybody, believed that back then.

He was radical in the sense that he not only opposed slavery, but wanted to end it.  He thought it evil enough that it had to end, and that was what those in the south could not abide.

It took another 100 years after slavery ended to truly give blacks even a semblance of equal rights,
but Lincoln did make a start with that, when others weren't willing to take the risks he did.

[Michael Z]

Yes, certainly others contributed to the CCCP's fall, including Thatcher, Kohl, John Paul II, Walesa, Havel, Yeltsin, Schervadnadze, and of course Gorbachev, but certainly Reagan's victory in the Cold War should not rank as moderately bad! Even if you make Iran-Contra out to be as Watergate, MiamiU still ranks Reagan below Nixon! This can only be explained by ideological considerations, which should be strongly avoided as a factor when ranking presidents.

You have a point there.

Lincoln caused the Civil War

Hmmm, I'm not so sure about that. Many historians argue that the Civil War was inevitable, because conflict had been brewing for a long time prior to Lincoln's election.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I don't think that the Civil War was inevitable.
Certainly had either the Official Democrats or the Constitutional Union party won the war would have been averted.

It's got to be remembered that only the extreme Abolitionists(eg. John Brown) and the Fire Eaters(eg. SC legislature) actually wanted a war.
Lincoln was not directly responsible(and I doubt that he wanted a war), but he was indirectly responsible as he and the rest of the Republican party were very divisive.

I don't have a problem with Lincoln himself, he was a flawed giant, but I do have a problem with the cult that has grown up around him.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

LBJ was great just as Nixon was great.
I find Nixon abhorrent and you dislike LBJ, but great is not the same as good.

[jravnsbo]

WHAT??

LBJ underrated, can we say Vietnam and NOT WANTING TO WIN!  If you got to War you go to win.  I agree with the war, but not of his micromanaging it.  You let the generals run the wars.  Then there was the Great Society, or the Great Giveaways which never helped even though BILLIONS of dollars were spent.

Lincoln not great?  When he took over from Buchanon who had done nothing (so I'd have Buchanon as one of the worst President) the war was already at a boiling point.

"other than a token proclamation of their freedom"  WELL YEAH BESIDES THAT.  geez.

I think that the most under-rated president is LBJ, while the most over-rated is Lincoln.

LBJ's domestic policies helped millions of people escape from poverty and gave Blacks basic civil rights.

I don't like Lincoln.
He is usually credited as freeing the slaves and ending the Civil War.

Lincoln caused the Civil War(which was NOT about slavery, which although a terrible institution would have died out within a few years as it would have become economically stupid), he only freed the slaves(most of which continued to work for very bad wages under their old masters and on the same plantations),  because it would ruin the economy of the south.
He was an abominable racist(his view of Black people apparently shocked many southern congressmen) and did nothing to help black people other than a token proclamation of their freedom.

[Gustaf]

The Civil War wasn't really about slaves, but about states v federal government and economical issues like free trade. Also, Lincoln did not actually advocate an abolition of slavery just a confinement to those states who already had it.

[afleitch]

Okay, an 'across the pond' view on Top 5 President's (post war) here! Attack me at your will.

1. Bill Clinton (Steady economy, genuine care for social values. Indirectly helped create New Labour in the UK under Tony Blair)

2. Richard Nixon (Scandal aside, history will judge him kindly. Do you think we would have such and open and co-operative China today if it wasn't for Nixon?)

3. Lyndon Johnson (Again, his Medicare achievements echoed British style Welfare State reforms. His tenure coincided with that of Labour's Harold Wilson in the UK who legalised abortion, homosexuality, easier divorce and a whole wave of reforms.)

4. Jimmy Carter (no reason here, hes just a nice guy!)

5. Ronald Reagan (No one can deny his 'hurt to help' policies worked, similar to Thatcher's over here. And im saying this as a Social Democrat!)

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

LBJ was great just as Nixon was great.
I find Nixon abhorrent and you dislike LBJ, but great is not the same as good.

LBJ was out of control. He didn't try to end Vietnam. He just sent more and more troops in. Nixon ended the Vietnam War. He had the BALLS or Kissinger did, to do it. We had control of 90% of the Territory for South Vietnam when we did pull out. After we left, Congress withdrew funding and then North Vietnam gained ground again. It's the Congress' fault that the final outcome of the war was so negative.

[jravnsbo]

Congress did not cause the downturn.  LBJ did.

The North wouldn't even talk at the peace talks except about stupid stuff like the size of the meeting table because we had traitors like Hanoi Jane Fonda out helping th eother side.  So they stalled until Nixon renewed Bombing of the North and they started to talk again.

You can't fight a limited war.  War is hell, get in and get it done!

[Cairo_East]

LBJ's legislative legacy is far better than his foreign policy legacy.  He passed the most important legislation of the latter 20th century, directly affecting the social make-up of the USA today.

The Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Housing Act effectively ended segregation, the Fair Immigration Law of 1965 eliminated the quota system and vastly increased the cultural diversity in the US, and of course Medicare.

The riots and demonstrations are long gone, and what is left from his presidency far better America than it would have been without him.  It's why I put him in my Top Ten list.

[dazzleman]

LBJ's legislative legacy is far better than his foreign policy legacy.  He passed the most important legislation of the latter 20th century, directly affecting the social make-up of the USA today.

The Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Housing Act effectively ended segregation, the Fair Immigration Law of 1965 eliminated the quota system and vastly increased the cultural diversity in the US, and of course Medicare.

The riots and demonstrations are long gone, and what is left from his presidency far better America than it would have been without him.  It's why I put him in my Top Ten list.

LBJ had a great legislative legacy in terms of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, but beyond that I think he did far more harm than good.

I think it's a great tragedy that LBJ followed up on his well-conceived plans to bring blacks into the mainstream with programs that encouraged the poor to rely more heavily on government programs.  Liberalized welfare programs increased dependency, and encouraged the kind of behavior that can only result in poverty.  Black illegitimacy, a strong predictor of poverty and criminality, jumped from 25% in 1965 to 70% today.  LBJ's approach to crime (rehabilitation, not punishment) also helped lead to a tripling of the per-capita crime rate since the early 1960s.

The meltdown of the black family has undone a lot of the good in Johnson's civil rights platform.  And largely because of this, racial separation (I won't call it segregation, since it's not imposed by law) has persisted throughout the country.  Housing laws only go so far when millions of individual decisions, made on the basis of perceived self-interest, lead to continued separation of the races.

I think that if LBJ had backed programs designed to create self-sufficiency rather than dependency, and if his administration had been a little more realistic and a little less idealistic, those he wanted to help would be in a far better position today than they are.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

See what I mean? You can disagree whether or not LBJ was a good President but it's a fact that he was great

The same can be said for Jackson, Lincoln, Nixon etc.

[jravnsbo]

hw can you say he was great? especially when their is such heated debate if he was eeven good, which I would consider to be BELOW great

[Nym90]

Nixon took a heck of a long time to end the war in Vietnam, though. 5 years after he came in with his supposed "secret plan to end the war", and we were still there. Nixon basically continued the policies of LBJ in Vietnam after having said that he wouldn't.

I agree that Johnson is one of the best Presidents we've had, he was duped into going into Vietnam by the Gulf of Tonkin which was a complete staged lie. Johnson was fooled by the military into starting the war because the military wanted to kick some commie behind (think of General Buck Turgidson or General Jack Ripper from Dr. Strangelove. One of the best movies of all time, by the way, if you've never seen it. An absolute classic! The only thing very unrealistic about it though is that no one with the name Merkin Muffley could ever get elected President!)
Johnson never would've gotten into the war if he hadn't been fooled into thinking that the Vietnamese had attacked our ship in the Gulf of Tonkin. Then once we were in, we couldn't just run out with our tail between our legs. It was a very difficult situation, Johnson made some obvious mistakes, the largest being a lack of effective communication with the public and misinformation about how things were going (though that happens in every war). Overall though, I think he did the best he could with what he had to work with.

[Gustaf]

Nixon took a heck of a long time to end the war in Vietnam, though. 5 years after he came in with his supposed "secret plan to end the war", and we were still there. Nixon basically continued the policies of LBJ in Vietnam after having said that he wouldn't.

I agree that Johnson is one of the best Presidents we've had, he was duped into going into Vietnam by the Gulf of Tonkin which was a complete staged lie. Johnson was fooled by the military into starting the war because the military wanted to kick some commie behind (think of General Buck Turgidson or General Jack Ripper from Dr. Strangelove. One of the best movies of all time, by the way, if you've never seen it. An absolute classic! The only thing very unrealistic about it though is that no one with the name Merkin Muffley could ever get elected President!)
Johnson never would've gotten into the war if he hadn't been fooled into thinking that the Vietnamese had attacked our ship in the Gulf of Tonkin. Then once we were in, we couldn't just run out with our tail between our legs. It was a very difficult situation, Johnson made some obvious mistakes, the largest being a lack of effective communication with the public and misinformation about how things were going (though that happens in every war). Overall though, I think he did the best he could with what he had to work with.

I agree that Dr. Strangelove is very good (like most Kubrick films)

[Gustaf]

To return to subject: the Christmas number of The Economist features a ranking of the last 20 American presidents compared to the last 20 British monarchs to see whether inherited positions give much worse results than a republican system. The monarchs actually win narrowly...

The ranking is simply that each of these persons is given a score from 1 to 4, where 4 is worse and 1 is best. There is no particular order within each number category, but I did put GWB and Clinton close to each other, so as to try to make both parts happy!

FDR: 1 "Saved the world"

TR: 1 "Inconstant but inspiring, a reformer"

Ronald Reagan: 2 "Good cold warrior, amiable, limited"

Grover Cleveland: 2 "Decent and able in most  corrupt of times"

Harry Truman: 2 "Rose to the occasion, good helpers, policies"

Dwight Eisenhower: 2 "Decent post-war consolidator"

JFK: 2 "Able, good ,missile crisis, little achieved"

William Taft: 2 "Decent, stolid, fat"

Woodrow Wilson: 2 "Great reformer, though tragic figure"

LBJ: 3 "Good reforms, bad economics, worse war"

Gerald Ford: 3 "Decent but limited succedaneum"

Jimmy Carter: 3 "Good intentions, few achievements"

George Bush Sr.: 3 "Good war, otherwise mediocre"

William McKinley: 3 "Mediocrity"

Calvin Coolidge: 3 "Honest, but limited"

Bill Clinton: 3 "Brilliance outweighed by dishonesty"

GWB: 3 "Too soon to rate him more highly"

Richard Nixon: 4 "Capable of brilliance, but corrupt, reckless"

Herbert Hoover: 4 "Failed to rise to the occasion"

Warren Harding 4 "Stupid and corrupt"

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

LBJ's legislative legacy is far better than his foreign policy legacy.  He passed the most important legislation of the latter 20th century, directly affecting the social make-up of the USA today.

The Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Housing Act effectively ended segregation, the Fair Immigration Law of 1965 eliminated the quota system and vastly increased the cultural diversity in the US, and of course Medicare.

The riots and demonstrations are long gone, and what is left from his presidency far better America than it would have been without him.  It's why I put him in my Top Ten list.

I should have included President Johnson in my Top Ten List. I would have done so only on the Domestic front, not on Foreign Affairs. The Voting Rights Act was a part of the Kennedy/Johnson plan, he did it in memory of the President.
     However, I also did not include him because of allegations of his involvement in President Kennedy's assassination. He called the NSA [National Security Agency] forces that were in Texas in advance of Kennedy's arrival and told them to withdraw, that they were not needed! I was told this by an Academic Scholar who was part of the eight man march  with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and he was arrested, and thrown in the Birmingham, AL jail with Dr. King. He had experienced a lot and was involved heavily in stuff back then, before becoming a prof.

[Nym90]

That's a complete bunk of a conspiracy theory. LBJ wouldn't have that kind of power to be able to call off the NSA, I don't really think that is a decision for Vice Presidents to make. And even in the unlikely event that it is true, I'm sure there is likely to be a more plausible explanation for why it was done. You're dealing with mighty circumstantial evidence there.
Security in general was a lot more lax back in those days. Today, there is no way they would allow someone to have a gun in a building along the parade route of the President. Plus the President would not be likely to be riding in an open top car along a parade route now anyways. But it was the 1960's, and people just didn't think such a thing would happen. The security was just not what it is today.

[JNB]

 I would say that LBJ and Nixon are among the most damaging presidents the US ever had,  in terms of how they dramatically increased the size and scope of federal govrenmnet and how both LBJ and Nixon pushed the federal govrenment to micromanage the affairs of its own citizens. Most of the social problems the US has todaym, and many of the fiscal problems can be laid at the feet of both the Great Society programs and the social programs Nixon introduced in the early 70s.

   To me, the lats great president was Truman, a man who did not care about world opinion, a man who did what he thought was best, regaurdless of what others thought.

  My list would be for the top 5 would be., though in no order are

  1.)  FDR
  2.) Truman
  3.) Lincoln
  4.) Jefferson
  5.) Madison

   Reagan had he had congressional majorities to impliment what he wanted to implement on domestic issues may have been in the top 5, but he didnt because of the annoying aspect of split ticket voting, a aspect of Americans politics that has for the most part vanished in the last 10 years thankfully.

[© tweed]

JNB, your list looks good except for Madison.  Why is he there?  He didn't do anything that monumental, unless I am seriously mistaken.

[JNB]

 James Madison was the author of a large portion of the constituion. Yes it was before his presidency, but his influence on the US was monumental.

[© tweed]

 James Madison was the author of a large portion of the constituion. Yes it was before his presidency, but his influence on the US was monumental.

Fine enough....

[Wakie]

JNB, your list looks good except for Madison.  Why is he there?  He didn't do anything that monumental, unless I am seriously mistaken.

Not necessarily true.  As JNB pointed out, he was a major contributor to the Constituition.  He held the nation together while it was getting slammed in the War of 1812 (imagine how a modern Pres would be cheered if he held things together after Washington was burned).  Madison served as Sec. of State during the Jefferson years and helped to engineer the Louisiana Purchase.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

JNB, your list looks good except for Madison.  Why is he there?  He didn't do anything that monumental, unless I am seriously mistaken.

Not necessarily true.  As JNB pointed out, he was a major contributor to the Constituition.  He held the nation together while it was getting slammed in the War of 1812 (imagine how a modern Pres would be cheered if he held things together after Washington was burned).  Madison served as Sec. of State during the Jefferson years and helped to engineer the Louisiana Purchase.

It's true that we never hear of Madison very often. But he was instrumental in those accomplishments.

[© tweed]

JNB, your list looks good except for Madison.  Why is he there?  He didn't do anything that monumental, unless I am seriously mistaken.

Not necessarily true.  As JNB pointed out, he was a major contributor to the Constituition.  He held the nation together while it was getting slammed in the War of 1812 (imagine how a modern Pres would be cheered if he held things together after Washington was burned).  Madison served as Sec. of State during the Jefferson years and helped to engineer the Louisiana Purchase.

Yes, but what did he do *as president*?  That's why he isn't top 5 on my list.