George Washington vs. Franklin D. Roosevelt

[Meursault]

I'm probably the political opposite of an American New Dealer/'social liberal' (and not, to wit, a conservative), and I don't think it's even really arguable that Roosevelt was much Washington's superior in terms of pure leadership qualities - charisma, the commanding of loyalty from subordinates, etc. If we completely ignore any question of ideology or historical placement, Washington was quite lacking in those traits that make for exceptional Presidents; much more of his reputation is based on his placement than are the reputations of those often taken to be his equals by commentators, like the Roosevelts, Jackson, Lincoln, Reagan, etc.

[Meursault]

Washington by a country mile. He was literally the perfect man for the job.

The job was also created to fit the man

To be fair he rebuffed attempts to make him a monarch and set the precedent that the President didn't serve for a lifetime.

But as far as pure leadership ability goes, Washington really was not brilliant at it. He was not a great public speaker (could scarcely speak at all, for the pain in his teeth); did not command the loyalty even of those who ostensibly supported his policy goals (Hamilton intrigued against Washington almost as much as against Jefferson); and did not inaugurate any great transformation in the way politics was done in the country, the basic outline of American bicameralism being present under the Articles.

Washington as "Father Of His Country" is the Greatest Of All Time. Washington the historical character would probably be remembered on a par with a Chet Arthur or a Benjamin Harrison - good, but not remotely memorable - if not for his status as the first President, or if he were President at some period after the first term of office. Roosevelt was unquestionably better at the job; most of the Great Presidents were better at it, though not necessarily that much so.