Thursday, February 19, 2015
Ranking the US Presidents
In class, we will discuss the roles of the president and how the president can impact many things. Before we begin, take a look at this article and let me know your reaction. Be sure to include who you think is at the top and the bottom of your list of presidential rankings.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Honestly, I agree to these rankings. The top 3 are definitely Lincoln, Washington, and FDR. However, I do feel FDR takes the top spot because of his contribution in both the Great Drepression and WW2. The bottom is definitely James Buchanan because he was not a very effective leader and did not contribute to America in any way.
ReplyDeleteI was surprised to see how Clinton was up on the list and how far down Kennedy is. I would tweak some rankings here and there such as moving Clinton and Obama further down and moving Kennedy and Ford up the list. My top presidents are the top five and sadly at the bottom would be William Henry Harrison but only because he died after thirty days in office due to pneumonia.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with the majority of the article. The top 3 presidents should be Licoln, Washington, and FDR, because they so fundamentally help shape our nation and aided it in times of distress. But I was surprised to see Clinton with a higher rank than I would have anticipated, considering the backlash he received so long ago. I was also surprised to see Obama's ranking as well, but felt a sort of comfort in the fact that at least he is in the top 20. Buchanan and Harrison definitely should be last, due to the fact that one wasn't effective in office and the latter died 30 days within it. All in all, the article was pretty accurate.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article, I had a few disagreements. I was shocked that Obama was ranked in the top 20. I believe that he should be ranked just around where Bush is. Obama was ranked high in foreign affairs and military skill, yet he has done almost nothing to stop the threat of ISIS and Putins aggression. He continues to pull troops out of the middle east and those who remain are only there to train. He is also being accused of abusing his powers. I also believe that Kennedy is not the most overrated. He led the United States during the Cuban missile crisis. I believe that in this case, Obama was ranked high enough to be overrated. I believe that Lincoln is the best president and that Harrison was the worst, as he was president for only 32 days.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of this article, and I believe that the top three presidents listed should be in the top three rankings; however, I think that Washington should be considered the "best" president because he helped build America from its core, followed by Lincoln (for holding the nation together) and then FDR (for helping our country get back onto its feet after the Great Depression). Following these presidents, I think that the fourth, fifth, and sixth positions should belong to Truman, Bush (George W.), and Reagan. I agree with many of the bottom rankings, though; I think that the three "worst" presidents were Johnson, Buchanan, and Pierce.
ReplyDeleteOn a side note, I don't think that it's necessarily fair for Harrison to be ranked as low as he was, let alone at all; while he didn't do anything for our nation, he never really had the opportunity to because of his passing, either. I also don't agree with Obama being ranked yet as well; he's still in office, and he will be for another two years. In terms of measuring Obama's success as America's leader, this ranking doesn't seem like an actual ranking, but more of an approval rating instead - NBC should be the ones to show that, not this article.
While I do agree (for the most part) with the top five presidential rankings, I do have some reservations with the top ten --- especially with regards to Clinton. Though Clinton’s presidency was “ruled by peace and prosperity” it was substantially marred by his extramarital indiscretions. Certainly, this lapse in judgment should not damage his reputation as an effective president, but I do think that it should impact his ranking enough for him to lose his spot in the top ten…to be replaced with someone perhaps more “worthy” --- Barack Obama. I was surprised by the POTUS’ relatively low ranking on the list, though I suppose I should not have been, as every president is subject to extreme criticism during his term. HOWEVER, Obama was handed a country in a terrible financial crisis, and yet he has managed to (among other things) improve the unemployment rate and make health care affordable, which should certainly be taken into account. On another note, I do not necessarily agree with William Harrison’s low ranking, as he was not allowed a chance to show the country what he was capable of. Lastly, I think that Lyndon B. Johnson is the most underrated president; the Vietnam War (and possibly his own character) eventually proved to his demise, but he did push through civil and voting rights legislation, even when it was not the most popular choice.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I agree with the rankings of the top 5 presidents in this article. These presidents effectively helped shape our nation and aided it in times of anguish and certainly set the bar high for upcoming presidents. I wasn't exactly surprised to see that Clinton was above Obama on the rankings because of Clinton's record of 115 months of economic expansion that helped the economy at an average of 4% per year since 1993. Clinton also provided the American people with more than 222 million new jobs in less than eight years while Obama struggles with how to terminate military action in the Middle East and his preference to use American force in limited ways. As for the lowest ranked president, in my opinion, it could be George Bush based on his foreign policy, failure of commission, and sapped resources that through the nations budget into deficit.
ReplyDelete22 million*
ReplyDeleteFor the most part, I agree with the article's ranking of presidents. I think that while George Washington did do a lot for our country, namely establish it, I find that without Lincoln, it would have been all for naught. Lincoln was responsible for repairing our country when we were in dire need of it. I think the rest of the list is apt as well, though I find Obama's positioning quite curious. I think President Obama's presidency and the repercussions of it are yet to be seen, because of that, it's really hard to determine the quality of his two terms as president. To actually rank the president, like the article states, we need be removed a few years from President Obama's presidency. That being said, I think Clinton does deserve to be ranked above Obama, as we are removed far enough from his presidency, that his economic prosperity can almost overcome his extramarital discretions.
ReplyDeleteI mostly agree with the rankings of this article, except that Clinton would definitively not make it on my top ten list, considering his unnecessary entanglement in foreign conflicts, especially during his first term. Obama ranking 18th was not unexpected to me, since he did start his first term in the middle of economic downturn. He did pretty well when compared to where he started eight years ago. However, I was surprised that Obama ranked higher than Polk, who I think is underrated because he actually contributed a lot to America by being responsible for gaining a large portion of its territory during the age of expansion. As for my ranking of the best and worst president, I agree that Lincoln is ranked number one because in one of the worst times in America's history, he was able to keep the country from completely falling apart. Who knows what could have happened if Lincoln was not there to oversee the civil war and the conflict of slavery? The worst president, in my opinion, would have to be Harding, because he was indecisive, vague about his ideals, and obviously did not take the position seriously enough. Being the president of the US is a crucial job, and those who do not show enough responsibility and willingness should not be nominated in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the majority of these rankings, such as the overrated-ness of JFK (thought I think he should be even lower) - though he was an inspirational and charismatic figure, he was vastly inexperienced and unqualified, a weakness that showed itself severely in his dealings in foreign policy. However some rankings irk me on some level: Polk, for example, should be placed quite a bit higher than he is. Although he may have made some controversial decisions (his role in the Mexican-American War), he ended up nearly doubling the size of the Union, solving the dispute with Great Britain over the boundaries of Oregon, and establishing a lasting treasury system. I can, however, see why he was placed where he was. Some other presidents could arguably be higher or lower, while the extremes are more fixed. Lincoln is by far the top pick, and Buchanan a definitive bottom. Most of the middle depends entirely on one's opinion and viewpoint, a bias that cannot truly be removed. I do think Obama should not have even been included at this point; his presidency, due to the divisive nature of the political ideology of this modern era, ignites far too much controversy and it is simply too early to be able to gauge his presidency effectively without this fiery bias. Overall, it is a good and fairly accurate list.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Lincoln, Washington, and FDR should be the top three. They were incredible men, two of which got us through some of the worst periods in American history and one who started the traditions and legislation of our government, However, I feel that Clinton and Wilson should switch. I just feel that Wilson's achievements were better for the U.S than Clinton's were.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article I agreed with the presidential rankings for the most part. I was shocked to see that Bill Clinton was higher up on the list than Kennedy. I feel that Clinton should be farther down the list. However, my top choices would be Lincoln and FDR because they both were effective on helping America move forward. The worst president on my list would be Harrison because he was only president for 32 days.
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty obvious by the agreement of so many of my peers to this article and the majority of the rankings of our former and current leader(s). I do too concur with the majority of the article, especially with Lincoln being #1. He was a president that was able to keep the union together during such a difficult time in American history as well as pass the emancipation proclamation. I was a bit shocked at the fact that JFK was ranked mid-table, even below President Clinton. This shocks me because of the fact that although Clinton was a good president and passed a lot of good ideals during his administration his errors during office that ultimately led to his downfall. Nevertheless, the majority of the other presidents are in a right place in my opinion. As the article states also, President Obama has 2 more years to either "make or brake" his position to say the least.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the article for the most part. I think Lincoln and FDR are my top choices, with Washington behind them. I disagree with almost everyone else about Clinton. Clinton was actually a very good president, he is just remembered by one small detail than by his entire presidency. I also disagree with the ranking of Polk. I don't think people realized how much Polk accomplished. He solved many foreign difficulties and secured Texas and much of California for the nation. I think George W. Bush needs to be much lower on this list. He is by far one of the worst speaking presidents, and just seemed to half ass solve problems, which just created new ones. I would also put Hoover at the bottom. The president whose only accomplishment was a damn, and who only succeeded in further harming the economy during the Great Depression
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of this article. Most of the top and bottom ranked presidents correspond with where I would have ranked them. Lincoln and FDR deserve the top ranks because they did a lot to fundamentally shape the nation and effect a lot of what is the United States today. I was honestly surprised to see Obama on this ranking because, though he has served a term and a half, he still has two years left to make a mark (positive or negative). Two years is plenty of time to make any good moves or any terrible blunders. I agree with the most overrated presidents, most particularly Kennedy and Andrew Jackson (sorry Mr. Fertick). I think that a lot of the hype that surrounds JFK has to deal with the fact that he was assassinated.
ReplyDeleteAll in all, I definitely agree with the top 5 rankings since these were the presidents who shaped our nation, but I was shocked to see James Monroe rank just number 16 on the list, only two ranks above Obama. As he is known to preside over the War of 1812 and also help draft the Federalist Papers and the Constitution I would have thought it would hold more water when evaluating the ranking. Although his engagement when dealing with foreign policy wasn't as strong as his predecessors I was expecting for him to be higher on the list. Personally, the top president is Franklin Roosevelt, mainly because his accomplishments included; reforming the banking system, drastically decreased unemployment from 25% to 2% over his tenure, and the Good Neighbor Policy he developed, for the most part his accomplishments were effective and strategic. The president at the bottom of my list is Nixon due to his association with the Watergate scandal and thus his reputation thereafter.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I agree very much with this list. Lincoln is definitely at the top of my list. His ability to keep America from completely imploding on itself during such a time of crisis alone is enough to put him at the top, but he also took the first major steps to ending slavery in America (e.g. the Emancipation Proclamation). Franklin is also one of my favorite presidents because of his effective actions during the Great Depression. At the bottom of my list would also be Ford because he did not address the needs of this nation during the time that he was in the presidency. In other words, he did nothing for America.
ReplyDeleteI share the list as far as the top 3 presidents go especially considering Lincoln as first place. He reunited this country and freed slaves paving the first stepping stones down the path for Obama to become our great nations first black president. So Lincoln still has a residing impact on our country today. However for the worst president i would pick John Adams followed by Nixon and Clinton. John Adams allowed the establishment of the two party system which has been effective throughout pretty much all of Americas political history now. This two party system has in recent years proven inefficient and cannot for the life of it get anything done so John Quincy Adams really screwed us in the long run. I pick Nixon and Clinton to proceed him as terrible presidents just due to their inability to hide scandals. Every president has had their scandals no doubt however getting caught is a sign of sloppy behavior and the inability to maintain control of whatever situation they where dealing with in the White House.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with this article, for the top three presidents, Lincoln, FDR, and Washington. I am surprised to see Obama on the list, due to the fact he is not finished with his presidency. Although his presidency and Clintons presidency were so controversial, I'm glad to see they made the list, based on their contributions. Harrison should be at the bottom, due to passing away after only 32 days. I would like to see Reagan higher up on the list, due to his economic reforms and policies.
ReplyDeleteIn my mind, this is a very one sided survey. Presidential success is not necessarily only measured by political science professors and professionals. The regular people should have a part in determining a President's success. Although, overall I agree with the rankings as they are. The best president for me would be FDR, he was such an effective president and Lincoln bent a little too many laws (or outright broke them) to be fairly considered the best. At the bottom: Harrison. He was only there for 32 days due to his own obstinacy.
ReplyDeleteI do agree for the most part with this article. I was surprised at how high Obama was ranked considering he is still serving and things could change. It also made sense to me that Lincoln was ranked highest for his contributions to move our country towards progress and making decisions he thought best for the country, even if they weren't all completely legal. He made decisions for the good of the country and not just reputation as sometimes politics are done now.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of this article. However, I think it's very hard to rank a "best" president. There are many ways to evaluate a president's achievements and level of productivity, but most rankings are skewed by personal opinion and as the article stated, political ideology. Based on my best evaluation of these presidents, I think that Ronald Reagan should be ranked as the #1 president for many reasons. First off, one of his biggest achievements was ending the Cold War during his presidency. He also implemented the idea of "Peace through Strength" and built up our military in order to maintain peace on U.S. soil and world dominance as a nation. I think that it's very hard to qualify someone as the "worst" president, but based on the way Obama has abused his power as a president he is very low on my list. He has completely lacked building our army up in defense of the ISIS terrorist group. He also has done nothing to threat or punish ISIS after killing multiple U.S. Citizens. President Harrison is low on my list because he was only in office for 32 days, but I don't think you can argue he is the "worst" president for this because he did nothing wrong and had no control over when he died.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I agree with this article in that some presidents are overrated/underrated in public opinion and that with more recent presidents, it is hard to analyze the effects their actions effectively. With presidents such as Clinton, Bush, and Obama, can we sufficiently analyze the ramifications of their political actions? We have no idea how public opinion of them will sway in future generations, or how their political actions will play out. It is too early to understand the true "rating" of these presidents. Also, I highly agree with the author's argument that some presidents are overrated and underrated. Some presidents are glorified despite apparent flaws in their presidencies. Others are condemned for their actions, no matter if they were disadvantageous or not. Lastly, I believe that FDR should be on Mount Rushmore. That would be pretty cool.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Kennedy is overrated when it comes to ranking the presidents. I am surprised how highly ranked Obama is. I wouldn't expect him to be in the top 20 based off how even democrats are disappointed in his decisions. Perhaps in ten years he might go down a few ranks as opposed to rise a few ranks as Clinton did. I don't think any presidents should be added to Mt. Rushmore; however maybe a new monument that celebrates more great presidents should be completed.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I agree with most of this article. However, I believe that the controversies that Clinton encountered should have him placed at a lower rank on the list and I was surprised to see Obama at such a high rank, considering he isn't finished with his term. I agree with adding to Franklin Roosevelt to Mount Rushmore because he was an amazing leader during the Great Depression, WWII, and he is one of my personal favorite presidents. I agree with the overrated rank of Kennedy, I believe people were in awe of his glamour and attractive features rather than what he accomplished in office. At the bottom of my list would be Harrison, but its not fault he died after 32 days in office.
ReplyDeleteMany presidents are overrated or underrated due to critical events occurring during their time in office; For example, 9/11 seemed to have been a great boost in president Bush's public ratings, due to the way he led the country through the crisis. Although it was a tragedy, the terrorist attack gave Bush an opportunity to prove himself to the country. Another example would be Watergate, which terribly blemished the record of an otherwise extremely successful president.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the general consensus that it is far too soon to add Obama to any rankings, as his effectiveness as a president will be most evident with a detached view in the future, after his policies have begun to affect the country.
Personally, based on my education from AP US History, I would place Theodore Roosevelt at the top of my presidents-ranking. A close runner up is FDR, however he had a major war along with a depression giving him the opportunity to show his presidential prowess. Theodore Roosevelt's "big stick diplomacy" along with his "Square Deal" and trust-busting maneuvers proved his efficiency and thoughtfulness as a leader. He is one of the most accomplished presidents, and still the youngest president to have been inducted yet! The Roosevelt Corollary was also, in my opinion, a great political asset as it establishes the US as a police power for the world.
The least effective president in my opinion (who was at fault for what they did) would be president Hoover, who had failed to do anything to remedy the country in a time of depression; however, he was put in a bad situation. Another president who failed miserably would be James Buchanan, who had failed to prevent secession or the onset of the civil war, through his indecision.
For the most part I do agree with this article. Lincoln, Washington, and FDR are definitely my top 3. However, I think it's hard to judge some of the more modern Presidents (Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc.) on their legacies, because as the article said, "history is always shaping and reshaping the legacy of former presidents." Also, President Harrison would be at the bottom of my list; unable to create a legacy within his 32 day term.
ReplyDeleteI believe that ranking the presidents is a very arguable and subjective topic. Based on your own personal beliefs you may believe that some presidents are better than others. However, I agree that Lincoln and Washington are the competitors for the top spot as best president on this list. I'm still unsure as to whether I agree with F.D.R. being the third best-ranked president. I believe that once you hit the middle of the list of presidents, the reasoning becomes more vague and disagreeable because of minor details in each president’s career as well as the fact that you’re comparing presidents to others in completely different time periods. Lastly, I just want to point out that Obama should not yet be ranked on this list, because his presidency is not yet over. I believe that in order for a president to be ranked, and what the ranking system should be based on, is how effective their presidential decisions were on the nation, almost post-terms or at the end of their presidency.
ReplyDeleteThe general trend seems to be that presidents who pushed the envelope the most in terms of executive power are the ones who ranked well on the list. Lincoln flirted with the boundaries of civil law to assert control during the Civil War; FDR massively expanded the jurisdiction of the federal government in common society; and Teddy Roosevelt entirely reshaped the role of the government in international affairs. For that reason, I think this would be more appropriately called a ranking of most memorable presidents rather than "best," which I feel applies to skills like negotiation ability, open-mindedness, and policymaking achievements that are noticed less often as we look back in history at presidential administrations. With that said, I think it'll be interesting to see how Obama's popularity fares in the years after his presidency as historical context builds with respect to health care, social progress, and development in the Middle East.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that Lincoln would take the top spot. Any leader who successfully leads a nation out of a civil war should get that kind of credit. Washington, Jefferson, both Roosevelts, Truman, and Ike all get the notoriety they deserve. However, I would alter these rankings a bit. Kennedy, Obama, and even Nixon should be higher. Kennedy oversaw the Cuban Missile Crisis, the integration of a black student into Ole Miss, and began the dealings with organized crime and the space program. Obama's two terms turned around a faltering economy, created 3 million new jobs, and oversaw the assassination of Osama bin Laden. Even though Nixon's presidency was marked by watergate, his presidency deserves much more credit. Nixon began the removal of troops from Vietnam and was the first president to open up relations with communist China. Clinton's presidency saw a scandal as well and he remains among the top presidents. Frankly, W Bush deserves more than he is getting. He is often the scapegoat for all of America's problems in the early 21st century. Although he did not do an incredibly job with the economy, he did initiate the taking down of al-Qaeda and shaped how the nation feels today about terror organizations. James Buchanan takes the bottom spot. The lack of leadership and any real legislation is enough to cement that spot.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that this list is ranked on most remarkable and outstanding performances as president. I agree that the 4 presidents displayed in Mt.Rushmore are our top presidents in history. I don't think that it is fair to put Obama on this list. He hasn’t finished his term and still has room to prove or disprove himself. We can only base him off of what he’s done so far, and we haven’t had enough time to thoroughly evaluate the effect of his presidency. I agree that Abraham Lincoln is the best or most influential president in history. He changed America forever. Who could image the world if we were still segregated? Although, Lincoln may have abused his power to remain in control during the Civil War. I strongly agree that JFK is one of the most overrated presidents. People or women, think he was a good president because of his appearance and of the time period he was in. I don’t know much about the president on the bottom of the list except their names. So I cannot voice my opinion on the bottom feeders. All of the presidents in the middle of the pack are separated by a few little factors that can vary between graders. Ultimately, I agree with most of the list and there judgments.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the top three presidents, but I believe that since Washington helped build the foundations of our country, he should be ranked number one. Lincoln and FDR both held our nation together in times of panic and tragedy, and should be ranked second and third respectively. I believe Truman is underrated because of his dealings with the atomic bomb, United Nations, and the Cold War. Like many others, I am surprised how high up Clinton is ranked, as the Republican Revolution occurred during his first midterm and as he was impeached. However, I would not rank him as the worst president. At the bottom, I would have Harding, because of his indecisiveness; Johnson, because of his impeachment; and Tyler, because of his abandonment of the Whig party as soon as he was made president.
ReplyDeleteIt's no surprise to me that Abe Lincoln was ranked the number one president in history. He stood firm to his beliefs and put an end to slavery. Plus, he even has a movie about him which accurately displayed him transforming a time of despair into an era of hope. There isn't much to argue about the order of the top 10 presidents. However, it's important to consider that the time from one presidency to another can leave one president in a drastically different circumstance than another. Sure, Theodore Roosevelt goes down as one of the greatest presidents in history- mainly because his efforts towards the progressive movement in America. But, who's to say that if President Mckinley didn't get assassinated that he would have been just as influential during a time when America was becoming more progressive despite the efforts of a president. Also, it's no surprise to me that the presidents with the shorter terms were voted to be the worst presidents. They also had much less notoriety and chances to improve their status. I'm completely content with those who rest up at the top. And for those at the bottom, maybe they don't completely deserve the infamy they get, but a man like James Buchanan surely wasn't doing his job right.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I agree with the majority of the rankings, and there’s no doubt that Lincoln deserves the top rank. He held the union together during the most devastating war in American History. Not a lot of presidents could have been able to accomplish such. Without his outstanding leadership, the United States might still be divided into two separate nations today and slavery would have been abolished much later in the U.S. Buchanan also deserves the bottom rank; his failure to deal with the secession issue, irresponsibility with finances, refusal to take action against slavery, denial of state secessions made him the worst president. Furthermore, I feel as though Obama doesn’t quite yet deserve a spot, due to the fact that his presidency isn’t over. However, I can see why in some aspects he could be highly ranked, but also poorly ranked likewise. FDR was extremely influential to our country; leading our nation through two traumatic events such as the depression, and World War II. I agree with the voters that he should be added to Mt. Rushmore.
ReplyDeleteIt does not shock me in the least that Abraham Lincoln is the highest rated president in US history. In fact, saying otherwise would probably get you some hate. I understand why this survey only asked specialists in the field of American Presidents, but it would have been interesting to see the opinions of scholars juxtaposed to a wide sampling from the American public. Lincoln is a great president for preserving the union and forcing great social change, but it is hard to idolize a president that defies the Constitution by suspending the writ of habeas corpus. While I don’t believe in all of James K. Polk’s political stances (and wish Henry Clay had beat him for presidency), I have to tip my hat to him for setting up realistic goals for his presidency and seeing them through while keeping his promise to serve only one term. William Henry Harrison was an excellent and successful military general, but he had the shortest presidency because he was trying to prove that he (a 60-odd year old man) was still as young and strong as he used to be 30 years ago. He gave the longest inaugural address in presidential history in terrible weather and then hosted several parties and events back to back. No wonder he caught pneumonia and was dead within the month, and it all could have been avoided if had just worn a coat.
ReplyDeleteThough I don’t agree with the exact numbering of the chart, I do agree with the general rankings listed in the article. However, I believe that Barack Obama has been prematurely listed on the list. Barack Obama is still the President of the United States; therefore we cannot rank his presidency while it’s still in progress. Even after his time in office is over, the impact of Obama’s presidency cannot be accurately analyzed right away. In order to properly judge a presidency, once must allow for its impact to grow over time, and to analyze that growth. Also, when it comes to ranking presidencies, there is no area of comparison. Each president faced different issues during their respective presidencies, and to compare for example the Great Depression with the war on terror is a senseless comparison. However, the general trend is that a good president is one that takes authority and handles a situation, whatever it may be, responsibly and effectively.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the majority of these rankings. I believe Lincoln should be the highest ranked president, followed by Washington and FDR. Although Lincoln's actions were not all entirely constitutional, they resulted in the progression of the nation much more so than some other presidents' actions. I do not entirely agree with Obama's ranking within the top twenty, as it is still too soon to rank his presidency as a whole. I also agree with the bottom-ranking presidents in this article. Personally I would rank William Harrison and James Buchanan as the lowest-ranking presidents.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the majority of the article. FDR, Lincoln, and Washington no doubt take the top 3 for their enormous influence on the development of the United States of America. Washington created it, Lincoln ensured it's survival, and FDR made it a World Power. I don't think it's really possible to rank them in positions of 1,2, and 3 because they are so vastly different in how they changed america. I would push Wilson and Polk higher on the list as they definitely had greater influences than we give them credit for. The doubling of the size of the Union thanks to Polk and the effort to keep America out of WWI until absolutely necessary as well as the general policies of Wilson rank them higher in my mind. I think it is very difficult to rank Obama without a heavy amount of bias, because he is still incumbent, in fact I think only now that Obama is nearing the end of his term - can we really start to rank George W Bush. I DEFINITELY agree that Kennedy is overrated, and think that Clinton should also be pushed higher as his economic and political actions were in fact very successful and did a lot - desipte his poor personal choices, I don't think that should influence his ranking. I would rank Buchanan at the bottom for his inability to prevent or at least downplay sectionalist aggression and reliance on Henry Clay to compromise, until his death. I think that the ability of Presidents to bend the rules is a trait of strong and powerful leaders, who, as long as they keep their power in check, are actually much better off then if they were weighed down by politics. Lincoln, Jefferson, Roosevelt, they all disobeyed the constitution - and the country is better because of it.
ReplyDeleteFor the most part I can agree with the article, I was surprised at how high Obama was ranked due to the fact that he is still in office with time left for change (which could be negative). Also because although Obama's "progress" is there it isn't much of any real progress. What I don't agree with is the ranking of a "best" or "worst" president because in each presidents terms different happenings were occurring throughout the US. A good portion of presidents had pretty boring yet breezy (for the most part) terms compared to others such as Bush with 9/11. I believe a "best" and a "worst" are nonexistent, however, to me the most progressive and effective president in such a troubling time would have to be FDR. He was elected for four consecutive terms and managed to pull the country out of the depression as best he could. He reassured the nation with his fireside chats and seemed to not allow the idea of power to creep to his head. I believe if any president were to be added to Mt. Rushmore it should most definitely be FDR for the accomplishments he achieved for and with the country. Lincoln, deservingly, is high up due to his progression as well for the country during another one of the most troubling times, yet Lincoln used presidential power to outright break rules that are stated within the constitution. I don't think those actions of him should be punishable but it may move him down a notch in the "best" rankings to me. Personally I would say the least progressive president would be Hoover, solely because during the time our country plummeted into the depression he wasn't trying to make progress or help, he was simply just sitting back watching it all crumble in front of him. Harrison could also be pretty low for the fact that his presidency lasted for so little, but in the same sense it was so short he didn't have much time to do anything.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Lincoln, Washington, and FDR were the top presidents. Lincoln with the civil war, Washington with being the first president, and FDR having to deal with WW2, all three have been through the hard time in the US and I believe they earned the top spots. Overall I think it's really hard to say exactly who the best president is, I consider a good president by how they handle the economy, how big of a positive change they made, and how they handle situations. Those are key things to me and those 3 qualify so I think it's only right to put them on the top of the list
ReplyDeleteThere seemed to be a correlation between the presidents that were deemed the best and how they handled situations verses those that didn’t have a major impact. The article rated Abraham Lincoln as the greatest president (he did unite the country during the civil war). Second was George Washington who laid the groundwork of this country. FDR made the top three; after all he helped the country out of the great depression (Whom I personally think should have been named the greatest). That being said, the worst president according to the article is James Buchanan. But I feel as though Warren Harding is the worst. He failed to pay attention to the country and easily compromised while his administration was involved in the Teapot Dome Scandal. There was inefficiency with the ranks in the article and it is the fact that it was published in February 16th. This made it biased because the ones that are ranking are presumably living in this era. So, if the economy is doing well right now, Obama is going to go higher in the ranks. Hence why they should not have ranked him, when his presidency is yet to be over.
ReplyDeleteI found this article interesting because I’ve never really considered “ranking” our current and past presidents. Of course, everyone has their favorites for a variety of different reasons, but what qualities truly make a president worthy of being named the best. I agree with some aspects of the article such as ranking Lincoln as #1. I may be a little biased in my stance of saying that because Lincoln is in fact one of my favorite presidents, but I feel that many of Lincoln’s qualities make him worthy of being ranked #1. For example, I admire that he was often noted as brave and preserved because these are two qualities I find admirable in a president. His most noted success rank from his preservation of the Union during the civil war, to his fight to end slavery through the Emancipation Proclamation while although the proclamation only freed slaves in certain regions, it set the stage for the later 13th amendment that has become a huge part of our nation’s upbringing. I found it interesting that our current president, Barack Obama, was ranked #18 on the list when his term as president isn’t even over yet. I feel the people who were apart of this sample jumped the gun a little too quickly on that assessment. Not saying that Obama shouldn’t be on the list at all, but I feel that it was too early of an assessment and there are other presidents who may be more deserving of his spot. I am pleased to see presidents such as FDR, Reagan, Truman and Polk have graced the list, but am hesitant with Clinton being so high in the ranking due to his integrity not being the highest. I feel that the worst president we have had so far would be Andrew Jackson through many things such as the unjust spoils system, ignoring the Supreme Court’s rule in Worcester vs. Georgia and he believed Congress had no right under the Constitution to charter a bank post McCulloch vs. Maryland. Why he is even in the top 10 is appalling to me because I truly believe he was the worst president so far.
ReplyDeletei pretty much agree with this list. The presidents at the top took a lot of drastic action that I feel led the overall betterment of our country as a whole. While there may be some controversy about Lincoln overstepping his bounds by suspending Habeas Corpus, I feel that it is okay to overlook something like that and choose to believe he really felt that it was for the best. Also, it is difficult to place the more recent presidents like Obama and George W. Bush because not enough time has passed to see the overall effects of their presidency.
ReplyDeleteAlong with many others, I generally agree with the rankings presented in this article; however, personally I would put FDR in the #1 spot. He came to the rescue during a terrible period in our nation's history with his New Deal. Not only that, but throughout WW2, he proved to be an active supporter of the Allied powers, even when America was still officially neutral. Roosevelt remained a strong leader during the twelve years of his presidency, and his policies and ideas continued to have significant influence for decades afterward. I'd love to see his legacy represented on Mount Rushmore. Although there are a few men who both the presidential scholars from the article and the general American public view as the lowest ranking presidents, in my opinion Herbert Hoover gets the bottom spot. As the president in office at the start of the Great Depression, Hoover did not handle the economy's downward spiral very well. He increased taxes and substantially increased the national debt; two things that FDR used to beat him in the 1932 election. It is also commonly known that Hoover came to hate the presidency during his first term. Why he tried to run again is beyond me. As far as Obama's ranking goes, I think the scholars pinned his ranking fairly accurately. He may not be finished with his presidency yet, but he has accomplished many of the goals he set out to perform. Our economy has improved, and we have pulled many of our soldiers out of the middle east. There is no doubt that Obama has made some mistakes, but so has every other president.
ReplyDeleteThe article had the typical top ten that I would expect to see, Abe was at the top with Washington and Roosevelt in close second and third. I was more shocked by the fact that Obama was at number 18 since he still has time left in his second term. I didn't think they would rank him while he was still in office. I agree that Abe could be the best easily but Washington is just as qualified for that top spot; Abe had to keep the union together during the worst war in Americas history and had to make the decision regarding slavery that would end up causing the war, while Washington had to have the guts to led a newly formed nation that had just seperated from a powerful mother country. Either of them could take the number one spot in my eyes. On the opposite end of the spectrum the presidents with shortened or incomplete terms are generally viewed as not as successful because they didn't have the same time to make a difference as two term presidents did. I agree with the article Buchanan wasn't good at decision making and taking action when it was needed. Overall the article does a good job in defining who the top presidents were.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the top ten presidents; however, just like the article said, history is always changing and the list may shift a bit. Also in regard to who else should be added to Mount Rushmore, I do believe that it should be Franklin D Roosevelt. He was an amazing president and I love the idea of his fireside talks and how he tried to connect with the public. In regard to who were the worst presidents, I guess I agree with the listed presidents in that section of the article as well. Those presidents aren't frequently spoken about in history and we haven't heard any great accomplishments from them throughout history class throughout our education.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the general order of the rankings, and I do believe Lincoln deserved the top spot. Although he did some unconstitutional things, he also preserved our nation through an awful Civil War, and his Emancipation Proclamation laid the groundwork to end slavery. I agree Washington should be 2nd because he helped develop our country, and played a huge role in the Revolutionary War. Thirdly, FDR, who helped get the nation out of our Great Depression, deserves his spot as well. The highest ranking Presidents are the ones who had to deal with major conflict, and handled it well. However, I believe Hoover should be ranked last. Yes, Buchanan wasn't a good President, but Hoover was in office when the Great Depression started, and he didn't help to get us out of it. That was an extremely hard time on our country, and as President he should've been able to make the situation better. I also believe Obama deserved his ranking even though his term isn't over. Judging by what he has done so far he earned it, and if he makes mistakes in his remaining years in office he will be lowered.
ReplyDeleteI was looking at the graph and the list and as soon as I saw any Bush over Obama, I couldn't take this article serious at all. First of all, I don't think JFK is the most overrated, he only prevented WW3 from happening. I think that the number one on that list, Lincoln, is the most overrated. People just like his beard. And to be honest, I don't even know half the people on this list, apparently they was presidents. But I think it is fair to put the Rooselvelt close to the top and the ones in the bottom should be the ones no one ever heard of or cares about. I used to like LBJ as my favorite president, but I think my favorite is Reagean and his economic policies
ReplyDelete