Rank The Presidents...

First, rapid blush: Reagan's at least ten spots too high, Nixon's at least ten spots too low.
 
Seems like an ok ranking. To be fair I would have Obama above G-Dub. I think Clinton is too high. Reagan is a bit too low. Washington is too high. FDR is way too high.
 
weso1 said:
Seems like an ok ranking. To be fair I would have Obama above G-Dub. I think Clinton is too high. Reagan is a bit too low. Washington is too high. FDR is way too high.
Click to expand...

I thought the positioning of both Roosevelts was just about right.
 
Reagan, Clinton, and LBJ are too high.

And why even include William Henry Harrison?

Agree in general on Bush and Obama. They're bad, but not too bad.

ALso I wonder inside if Lincoln is viewed as extremely high and positive as he is cause of the turds all around him. Pierce, BUchanon, and Baldwin lookalike Fillmore were all terrible, and Johnson obviously sucked. But even after that, Grant was terrible, Hayes, Garfield and Arthur were mediocre.

Also I'd drop Adams a good chunk of spots. He was a pretty ****ty president but not terrible. Seemingly their reason to put him that high was his role in the constitution.

I think the top 5 is alright. You can argue the order, I would drop Adams, Reagan, and Madison out of the top 10 and bring in Wilson, Jackson, and Polk. Gotta respect what Polk was able to accomplish as a president that no one really wanted.

IMO you cannot have JFK and Reagan too far apart. You have 2 guys who's primary value is as a cult of personality. So say if you have Reagan at 10, JFK is 9. JFK was a better president than Reagan, but they were really similar.
 
acesfull86 said:
FDR about 40 spots too high for me
Click to expand...

To put it bluntly, things like this is why no one winds up taking libertarians seriously. The man was at the helm for WWII. It's not his fault that other presidents couldn't figure out how to update his new deal proposals then LBJ went and really ****ed it up with his great society things. Or you know FDR could have done nothing and let thousands if not millions of Americans starve in poverty.
 
zitothebrave said:
To put it bluntly, things like this is why no one winds up taking libertarians seriously. The man was at the helm for WWII. It's not his fault that other presidents couldn't figure out how to update his new deal proposals then LBJ went and really ****ed it up with his great society things. Or you know FDR could have done nothing and let thousands if not millions of Americans starve in poverty.
Click to expand...

FDR deserves his ranking. However, bringing the U.S. out of the Great Depression had a whole lot more to do with the production required to fight a World War on two fronts than it did on the New Deal programs. The people that tout the New Deal as an example of the success of Keynesian economics leave out that very important fact.

Like you said though, it's not fair to hold FDR responsible for the generations who bastardized his work. He set up his programs to incentivize work, unlike the current programs brought on by the Great Society which kill the work ethic of many recipients of aid.
 
Libertarians tend to hate FDR and Lincoln. I've always gotten kind of a chuckle out of that. Arguably the two greatest American presidents, and certainly the two who steered the nation through the darkest times. The libertarian tendency is to be so absolutely wrapped up in ideological purity as to discredit the concept of leadership and the realities of governance.
 
I always seem to disengage from reviewing these lists that have Washington and Lincoln ranked first and second.

Okay, we get it ... how about the meat and potatoes?
 
DirkPiggler said:
FDR deserves his ranking. However, bringing the U.S. out of the Great Depression had a whole lot more to do with the production required to fight a World War on two fronts than it did on the New Deal programs. The people that tout the New Deal as an example of the success of Keynesian economics leave out that very important fact.

Like you said though, it's not fair to hold FDR responsible for the generations who bastardized his work. He set up his programs to incentivize work, unlike the current programs brought on by the Great Society which kill the work ethic of many recipients of aid.
Click to expand...

I don't think FDR brought the US out of the depression, I think though his programs did save a lot of lives. **** in the depression was really freaking bad. Again I'm talkign about people dying. I think FDR's stuff was a standby that if not for WWII would have lead us to another depression most likely or at least a recession. But again, his plan did get a lot of people the means they needed to survive. Not thrive, but survive.

It's just sad we haven't had a great president since Eisenhower. JFK could have been great if he instead of getting assassinated pulled out of Vietnam and removed Cuba's embargo, but alas, we don't know what could have happened, just what did.
 
weso1 said:
Seems like an ok ranking. To be fair I would have Obama above G-Dub. I think Clinton is too high. Reagan is a bit too low. Washington is too high. FDR is way too high.
Click to expand...

Not sure how Washington can ever be too high. He should be either 1 or 2 on everybody's list. The guy friggin declined a second term till we begged him. And then absolutely refused to do a 3rd term, despite overwhelming support.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top