Monday, February 19, 2007

Ranking the Presidents

Since it's President's Day, I figure I should discuss presidents in some way or another. I generally avoid ranking presidents, but I'll indulge this one day. Ranking them all is kind of absurd. How is the 27th best president better than the 28th? But we can have a little fun here by ranking the 10 best and 10 worst.

My criteria is to limit their contributions to what they did as president. Thus Jimmy Carter, while an amazing man in his years after leaving the presidency can hardly rank in the top 10 because of his mediocre performance in the Oval Office. Similarly, Thomas Jefferson isn't on this list because he was actually a pretty crappy president, despite his mind-blowing accomplishments. Also, modern moral considerations must be taken into account. Thus, James K. Polk was a tremendously successful president. He also stole half of Mexico to do it. So he doesn't make it on the list.

The Best

1. Abraham Lincoln. The obvious choice. Brought the US back together. Kept the border states in the Union. Mobilized a nation that had never been mobilized before, bringing the United States into the modern age. Issued the Emancipation Proclamation. Sure, you can criticize his delay in freeing the slaves, his willingness to suspend habeus corpus, etc., but who could have done better?

2. George Washington. Another obvious choice. Kind of forgotten about in a lot of ways today which is kind of strange. We owe him a great deal for creating a stable government and for leaving office out of 2 terms. That alone is enough to put him at #2.

3. Franklin Roosevelt. FDR was a great man. His program brought a sense of justice to the United States. He was bad on civil rights, but again, who would have done better in 1933? He brought the nation out of the abyss and fought World War II.

At this point, it starts getting kind of hard. I'm not a big fan of most American presidents.

4. Harry Truman. Desegregated the military, helping to spur on the civil rights movement. You can definitely question his role in starting the Cold War. But he carried on FDR's domestic legacy in a period of reaction, helping to ensure its long-term impact.

5. James Monroe. Perhaps a strange choice. Monroe was not an exceptional man. But the United States was incredibly divided during Madison's presidency, with New England on the verge of revolt during the War of 1812. Monroe ruled over a period of general placidness in the United States, allowing the nation to grow stronger. He hardly played a key role in the Missouri Compromise, but he didn't make the situation worse. Didn't play the key role in the Monroe Doctrine either, but he approved it and that's a good thing. For all the attacking of the Monroe Doctrine in the years after the Roosevelt Corollary, at the time it was a good thing, stating US opposition to European powers recolonizing Latin America.

6. Lyndon Johnson. That LBJ is #6 says a lot about how little I think of most American presidents. Of course, Vietnam was an unmitigated disaster. But the Great Society was a period of great hope and optimism in the US. Johnson made a positive difference in the lives of millions of Americans and deserves great admiration for that. He also signed the great civil rights legislation. The single best president on that issue.

7. John Adams. That he resisted the machinations of Alexander Hamilton and peacefully gave up the presidency to Thomas Jefferson in 1801 is enough to place him here. Like Washington, he did a lot to ensure the stability of the nation. He also worked to steer the nation clear of the craziness in Europe at that time.

8. William Howard Taft. I've talked about Taft before. He was a conservative man, it is true. But he also passed a tremendous amount of progressive legislation and lacked the inherent awfulness of the racist imperialist Theodore Roosevelt and the insufferable moralist Woodrow Wilson.

9. Bill Clinton. I absolutely cannot believe I'm saying this. While I hold Clinton largely responsible for the Republicanization of the Democratic Party, Clinton also stewarded the nation through one of the most successful economic periods in its history while dealing with a well-organized hate machine from the opposition and a hostile Congress for most of his administration. His foreign policy generally left much to be desired but at least he didn't get the US involved in any ridiculous ideologically-driven wars.

10. John F. Kennedy. Kennedy is greatly overrated. But there is good reason to believe that his second term would have been much better that his first. Really, he's here by default because I can't stomach anyone else. While he doesn't get the credit for civil rights that he might have had he not died, he also doesn't get enough of the blame for Vietnam that dogs LBJ.

If there is a #11, it might be Grover Cleveland for resisting imperialism alone.

The 10 Worst Presidents.

A much easier task. So many to choose from!

1. James Buchanan. Many current commentators, including historians say that George W. Bush deserves this spot. And while he does in fact deserve it, it is rather absurd to say that he is the worst president in American history. James Buchanan was the worst kind of northerner before the Civil War--a tool for the South. Buchanan saw the nation fall apart in his last months of office and decided to do nothing about it. Disgusting.

2. Franklin Pierce. Same as Buchanan except that he didn't have the opportunity for the nation to disintegrate. That he named people such as Jefferson Davis to his cabinet says plenty about his beliefs. His support for Stephen Douglas' popular sovereignty position is revolting.

3. George W. Bush. This is where Bush belongs. The worst minus the 2 pre-Civil War presidents. If Bush sent the US catapulting toward civil war, he would move to #1. As it is though, he is less horrendous than Buchanan and Pierce. However, we should not underestimate his crappiness. We won't know the true disaster of Bush's policies for another couple of decades as his stonewalling on climate changing and his gutting of environmental and labor policies, as well as health and business regulations will take some time to hit us with its full impact. Judging his foreign policy is quite easy.

4. Andrew Johnson. I actually have a good bit of sympathy for Johnson. He just never belonged in the office. But his support of the old Confederacy after the Civil War and sabotaging of Reconstruction is incredibly bad and deeply damaged this nation. That Bush is worse than this says a lot.

5. Richard Nixon. Say what you want about his policies, which outside of Southeast Asia, were average at worst. The damage to the American political system from Watergate is huge and long-lasting. For that alone, he belongs here.

6. Herbert Hoover. I also have a certain amount of sympathy for Hoover. He was a progressive in an age that took much more active government solutions. But he simply dropped the ball when the Depression hit. He was also a virulent racist.

7. Warren G. Harding. A total non-entity as a leader. Completely corrupt. Nothing good to say about the man. Kind of like a W without ideology.

8. John Tyler. His aggressive push for Texas annexation and his staffing cabinet positions with southern sympathizers such as John C. Calhoun and Abel Upshur at a time when sectional strife was still mostly below the surface in the United States gives him the honor of making this list.

9. Ronald Reagan. Probably #1 if you are a union member or Latin American. A complete and utter bastard who ushered in the modern right-wing. Many of his policies are not as bad as what his followers wanted. However Grandpa Caligula was a terrible human being.

10. James Madison. Stupidly took the US into a war with Britain that could have easily cost the nation its existence. A great man but not a good president.

Many of these rankings are highly debatable and perhaps dubious. So have at it if you object!

13 comments:

  1. Anonymous9:50 PM

    Um I would have liked to see Theodore Roosevelt on the worst list. I have a personal disgust with him and his view of languages other than English. One common language will not create any kind of political unity. So sad to see that his views continue with great strength today.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous11:37 PM

    Not sure I agree with your perceptions of Taft, seems to fit right up there with Polk and Reagan as far as Latin America is concerned. He was largely responsible (along with his wonderfully diplomatic secretary of state Philander Knox) for the beginnings of the American occupation of Nicaragua and all the subsequent events that resulted from that, i.e. Somoza dictatorship, revolution, war.... A simple regime change back in 1910 had some pretty horrible consequences

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous9:25 AM

    Can a "10 Worst Presidents" list really not have U.S. Grant on it? That hardly seems possible.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous11:53 AM

    Grant gets a lot of props from me and others for not abandoning Reconstruction.

    How that balances with widespread corruption is a pretty idiosycratic calculation, but I have to say he was right on the most important issue of his day.

    ReplyDelete
  5. First, a message to the deleted anonymous--racism will simply not be tolerated here. Go away!

    MJ--I too hate TR. I hate Wilson as well. The reason they are not on the bottom 10 is that the competition is so high. Ultimately, both accomplished a good deal of domestic legislation that keeps them off the bottom, despite their horrid foreign policies and racism.

    Yann--I can't disagree on your analysis of Taft. He was pretty awful on his foreign policy. He's up there in part because he did accomplish so much domestic legislation. While his foreign policy was bad (the first US governor of the Philippines after all), again, he accomplished a lot of valuable domestic gains. And his racism was less than TR & Wilson. But I probably should rethink his inclusion here.

    Witless--As for Grant, I know that he has gained a great deal of credibiility in recent years among progressives because of his Reconstruction policies. However, he was almost totally ineffectual at implementing those policies and he made virtually no difference long-term. He just didn't have the political skills nor the willingness to use force that Reconstruction needed. Good intentions just aren't enough for me. Plus, he allowed one of the most corrupt administrations in history, even if he was not personally corrupt. I just can't do it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous8:12 PM

    Interesting list. I would not have included Monroe on the Best List, since your reason for including him had little to do with him. The unity was because the Federalist Party collapsed, and the Monroe Doctrine was the product of John Quincy Adams.

    I'd rank Bush below the pre-Civil War Presidents, because I think the Civil War was going to happen anyway. They were bad, bud did not put the Constitution at risk. For the same reason I might include Nixon below them, but that's a toss-up.

    I'd put Fillmore there as well, both because his retreat from Taylor's policies was as important as Pierce and Buchanan's blunders, and because he later ran on the racist anti-immigrant Know Nothing ticket.

    And, even though I am a life-long Democrat and Liberal, I would be tempted to include Eisenhower on the best list -- but near the bottom of it. He did keep from making mistakes that were begging to be made, his 'I know war, and therefore I am a man of peace' position was extremely admirable, and he did give tacit support to the overthrow of McCarthy. (On the other hand, he gave us Nixon.)

    I have to put Wilson on the Worst List, because of his racism, because his own personality undercut his progressive legislation, and even more the League of Nations as an effective force.

    And not quite on the Best List, but a special prize for exceeding expectations should go to Chester Alan Arthur. A political hack and a machine politician who never deserved trhe job, once he got it, he proved to be both honest and competent.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yeah, I thought about Arthur. The Pendleton Act was a huge step in American history. He is certainly underrated. Maybe I'll have to do a Forgotten American post on him one of these days.

    I thought about Eisenhower too. But I just can't over the influence John Foster Dulles had on policy at that time and how damaging it was for American interests, well, even today. Domestically, not bad though. Worth thinking about.

    You make a strong case for Fillmore. As for Wilson, maybe he should be down there. His reputation sure has bottomed out with the foreign policy of this administration. Deservedly so too. I tried to avoid putting the Progressives on the bottom 10 because they all passed important domestic legislation. But he was an awful human being and an incorrigble racist. So he certainly would deserve a spot.

    Monroe--true it is a questionable pick. But he was the right man for the time so he kind of backs into it. Mostly, he didn't do anything stupid or inordinately offensive, placing him well ahead of almost everyone else.

    But the pre-Civil War presidents really did put the Constitution at risk as they were happy to undermine said document to serve their southern masters. And for all Bush has done, pushing for the country to become a truly slave nation is much much worse. But that Bush is actually worse than Andrew Johnson is pretty damning I think.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous8:48 AM

    You seem to practice reverse racism and sectional discrimination which reflects your ignorance and inability to be taken seriously when it comes to judgement of others.

    In summary, Lincoln was a scourge, FDR and LBJ were socialists that threatened our economy. Clinton reversed some of welfare's ill effects with the Welfare to Work legislation. Jefferson and Polk greatly expanded the scope and scale of the nation, and Polk reduced taxes to allow the most free trade the country had ever experienced and both championed states rights. John Tyler gets a good rec for trying to head off the Civil War and for annexing TX. Also Madison was instrumental in the formation and interpretation of the Constitution and his opposition to federal government power.

    Last but not least, history will probably show that Bush has more foresight of the threats faced by modern democratic societies than any other president. God bless him!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous11:03 PM

    Interesting list. Personally, I think it's a mistake to try and rank Presidents with terms of office much more recent than 50 years. The partisanship crossgrain is still too strong in memory. I can't see Reagan or the Bushes or Clinton near the top or bottom. Need to wait and see.

    I don't see how Jefferson was a bad President. During his term of office, he more than doubled the size of the nation and undertook the Lewis & Clark Expedition and put down the Burr Rebellion cleverly. And he made mistake or three (sanctions), but nobody's perfect. He did have a major moral failure in office by modern terms - setting down a successful ethnic cleansing policy, clearly evil today. But if you're going to ding him for modern moral standards, you're going to have to toss out all the Presidents before Carter. And then, by my 50-year-rule, we have no list atall, and that'd be no fun ;-).

    What I look at is, did they lead on the ethics of their days, or just let the ethical issues of the day pile up in a bag of sleaze (hi, Buchanan!). Jefferson pushed as far as he could on one particular issue, the liberty of people just like him. We can only do so much, and IMHO Jeff did alot, as little as it may look today.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous11:32 AM

    Different,

    Maybe you haven't been reading this blog very long? Anyway, I'm pretty sure his stategy is more intricate in that he tries to write fashionably, in a liberal sense, by criticizing mainstream America and championing the "down-trodden" in the name of social justice for the sake of garnering some perceived moral high ground and hence increase the liberal vote. It is the tried and true shield and sword of progressives in their attempt to gain power. The problem is that it can backfire after people can only take so much self-deprecating guilt.

    His ilk must think hmmm... we can try and
    1. judge the past by today's standards
    2. villianize our opponents by placing them in a morally undefendable position
    3. declare ourselves morally superior while utilizing the resources from those "less moral"
    4. misconstrue the incentives and drivers of behavior in our world
    5. and promote an environment of uncompromising negativism without real world solutions.

    "Never underestimate the power of the dark side" - Yoda

    ReplyDelete
  11. Jefferson gets a lot of credit for the Louisiana Purchase but that just dropped in his lap and he almost dropped over his constitutional scruples. And the embargo was a terrible idea and nearly drew the US into a war that we had no business fighting in. As for Lewis & Clark, I guess that's a good thing. It certainly facilitated American expansion for good and evil. Good point on the Burr treason issue. He did handle that quite well.

    As for the idiot Anonymous, he's clearly reading way too much into this blog. He must read it for some reason though. I wonder why.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yeah...and I think he's got his Star Wars analogies all mixed up.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It's always a good sign when you're quoting Yoda to back up a political point...

    ReplyDelete