President's Day -- Ranking the Presidents

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I dint see David Palmer on the list.

I don't believe you'll find a convincing way to compare a fictional president to an actual catastrophe.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I can't take this chart seriously.
I mean...Kennedy is surpassed by the Freemasons Roosevelts?

Please...this is spitting on JFK's grave.

First place: Kennedy
Second place: Lincoln

The last two places: the two Roosevelts preceded by some unspeakable Freemasonic stuff.

Keep in mind the list is not scientific.

 

[Stevicus]

I can't take this chart seriously.
I mean...Kennedy is surpassed by the Freemasons Roosevelts?

Please...this is spitting on JFK's grave.

First place: Kennedy
Second place: Lincoln

The last two places: the two Roosevelts preceded by some unspeakable Freemasonic stuff.

I think surveys like this probably say more about contemporary times than anything else. It's like trying to ask people's opinions about who was the better musician, Paul McCartney or Beethoven?

I recall when I was a kid, Jackson was considered a "Great" President and Polk was considered "Near Great," although now their rankings are more in the average rankings. I think Reagan is overrated in this survey. I'd put him around the same level as Nixon.

The Roosevelts' place on the list seems appropriate. I sometimes wonder how America would be different if Teddy Roosevelt was elected in 1912 instead of Wilson. Roosevelt died in 1919, when was 60. FDR also died relatively young, at age 63. Another interesting "what if" is if FDR had actually lived out his fourth term.

As for JFK, he had a certain charisma and persona which was somewhat inspiring to a lot of people. A staunch supporter of civil rights, equality, and social justice. But he was seen as too soft on communism and wanting to weaken America's defensive posture. (Plus, there were stories about how JFK "stole" the 1960 election from Nixon.) J. Edgar Hoover hated the Kennedys.

 

[Stevicus]

Now, here's an interesting point of comparison:

 

[Heyo]

I still see George W. Bush as the bottom of the presidential barrel. Two wars of aggression, a global recession, and a legacy of destruction and empowerment of terrorism through an utterly misguided "War on Terror"–and the echoes of all of these atrocious failures still affect millions of people to this day.

Trump doesn't even come close to that. Perhaps he would in a second term, with his hawkishness and dictatorial aspirations.

It seems starting wars, deceit of the public and trying to deceive the whole world, treason and economic incompetency are not highly prioritized by the political professionals. I think that says something about values in US politics in general.

 

[fantome profane]

Keep in mind the list is not scientific.

No, it is historic.

 

[Stevicus]

It seems starting wars, deceit of the public and trying to deceive the whole world, treason and economic incompetency are not highly prioritized by the political professionals. I think that says something about values in US politics in general.

Yes, I think such surveys are more reflective of contemporary values than anything else. 50 years ago, public perceptions of history and US Presidents were different, and they will be even more different 50 years from now.

For example, there are those who believe in the notion "what's good for business is good for America," so their evaluation of Presidents would be based solely on how good they were for business.

 

[Estro Felino]

I think surveys like this probably say more about contemporary times than anything else. It's like trying to ask people's opinions about who was the better musician, Paul McCartney or Beethoven?

I recall when I was a kid, Jackson was considered a "Great" President and Polk was considered "Near Great," although now their rankings are more in the average rankings. I think Reagan is overrated in this survey. I'd put him around the same level as Nixon.

The Roosevelts' place on the list seems appropriate. I sometimes wonder how America would be different if Teddy Roosevelt was elected in 1912 instead of Wilson. Roosevelt died in 1919, when was 60. FDR also died relatively young, at age 63. Another interesting "what if" is if FDR had actually lived out his fourth term.

As for JFK, he had a certain charisma and persona which was somewhat inspiring to a lot of people. A staunch supporter of civil rights, equality, and social justice. But he was seen as too soft on communism and wanting to weaken America's defensive posture. (Plus, there were stories about how JFK "stole" the 1960 election from Nixon.) J. Edgar Hoover hated the Kennedys.

I believe that JFK didn't yield to the Satanic élites that use the CIA as a tool to wage wars against innocent people.
That's why they had him killed.
And they killed his brother too. They left him alone for several years. As soon as they saw he was running and that he could win, they had him killed too.
Sirhan Sirhan must rot in prison and die there. If he wants to die at home, he must confess and apologize.
And expose those who hired him.


As for the Roosevelts...well...I can save FDR for acknowledging that he did very good with the New Deal and for fighting Nazism.
But Teddy Bear Roosevelt did anything to turn Central America into a colony.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It is, I believe, somewhat traditional to have an updated list of Presidential ranking on President's Day each, and of course this year is no different. I will admit, about one President's ranking I was not in the least surprised -- but another one's really shocked me, given the noise on social media these days.

No surprise (to me) Trump occupies far and away the bottom-most rank, with 10.92 points out of a possible 100. The big surprise is that Biden is quite far up, at 14th, with 62.66 points. (For comparison, Lincoln, at number 1, was scored with 93.87, Obama at number 7 with 73.88, John Adams at 62.66 (same as Biden).

Trump has touted his poll numbers against President Joe Biden ahead of a potential rematch in November. However, the 2024 Presidential Greatness Project Expert Survey, conducted by Qualtrics, has Biden significantly ahead of the former president.

The survey was conducted online among more than 500 members of the American Political Science Association, an organization of professionals in the field.

Historians rank Trump worst president in history, Lincoln the best - UPI.com

A new survey of historians ranks Donald Trump the worst president in U.S. history.

www.upi.com

View attachment 88509

I'm surprised that Taft ranked as well as he did.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I recall when I was a kid, Jackson was considered a "Great" President and Polk was considered "Near Great," although now their rankings are more in the average rankings.

They were both effective at their goals, but those goals were monstrous. I think their drop in the rankings comes from the American people growing a conscience.

 

[PureX]

In my opinion, in recent history at least, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Jr and Trump should be on the bottom of the list.

Reagan and Clinton destroyed the middle class and may well have ushered in the end of the US economy. While Bush Jr attacked and invaded two sovereign countries because he was too stupid to say no to Cheney, who was just looking to make himself and all his old cronies at Halliburton billionaires. And Trump ignored a global pandemic, then tried to overthrow our democracy when he got 'fired' for it.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Yes, I think such surveys are more reflective of contemporary values than anything else. 50 years ago, public perceptions of history and US Presidents were different, and they will be even more different 50 years from now.

For example, there are those who believe in the notion "what's good for business is good for America," so their evaluation of Presidents would be based solely on how good they were for business.

I am willing to bet, however, that no matter how values might change in future, Trump will not rise much, if at all, in future surverys.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Being British I'm not really in a position to judge as to so many of these even if I have been alive for more than seven decades. JFK did seem to be a distinct hope at the time (being 17 when he died) but I doubt any president will overtake Trump as appearing to be the dimmest, the most vulgar, the most deceitful, and possibly the most dangerous of any who rise to high office. I can hardly believe why so many might support him apart from simply supporting the party he represents.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

It is, I believe, somewhat traditional to have an updated list of Presidential ranking on President's Day each, and of course this year is no different. I will admit, about one President's ranking I was not in the least surprised -- but another one's really shocked me, given the noise on social media these days.

No surprise (to me) Trump occupies far and away the bottom-most rank, with 10.92 points out of a possible 100. The big surprise is that Biden is quite far up, at 14th, with 62.66 points. (For comparison, Lincoln, at number 1, was scored with 93.87, Obama at number 7 with 73.88, John Adams at 62.66 (same as Biden).

Trump has touted his poll numbers against President Joe Biden ahead of a potential rematch in November. However, the 2024 Presidential Greatness Project Expert Survey, conducted by Qualtrics, has Biden significantly ahead of the former president.

The survey was conducted online among more than 500 members of the American Political Science Association, an organization of professionals in the field.

Historians rank Trump worst president in history, Lincoln the best - UPI.com

A new survey of historians ranks Donald Trump the worst president in U.S. history.

www.upi.com

View attachment 88509

Interesting. No doubt Trump is the worst, but I don't agree with a lot of these rankings. Obama was a decent president but should definitely not be ranked above Kennedy imo. And Bush 2 should be in the bottom 5.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I would love to see them apply this same metric, but to fictional Presidents. Kind of like the Forbes Fictional 15.

 

[Stevicus]

I believe that JFK didn't yield to the Satanic élites that use the CIA as a tool to wage wars against innocent people.
That's why they had him killed.

Based on some of the viewpoints which were prevalent at the time, there were quite a few who likely believed that communism and the USSR were "Satanic," implying that anyone who was too soft or appeared to be sympathizing with the plight of the poor, disadvantaged, or downtrodden, was also "Satanic." The turn of Cuba towards the Soviet sphere of influence, along with the Cuban Missile Crisis, probably scared the bejesus out of a lot of people, which could have led some people to believe that if JFK wasn't neutralized, the US could be invaded or even nuked. I can see where some might have been convinced that it was a matter of life or death for the United States of America.

I'm not directly claiming any conspiracy here, but based on the perceptions of the era, I can see where more than a few people might have had the thought in the back of their minds.

Consider this scene from the movie Seven Days in May, released in 1964, in which some of the nation's prevailing fears were outlined:

Of course, the movie was totally fiction, and it ended on a somewhat hopeful note. But I also take note of the general's position where he believed the situation was so grave and so urgent that "we can't wait a year for the next election," implying that the President had to be taken out now - not a year from now. Ironically, LBJ won in 1964 because he was seen as saner than Goldwater, who was painted as some kind of nut.

And they killed his brother too. They left him alone for several years. As soon as they saw he was running and that he could win, they had him killed too.
Sirhan Sirhan must rot in prison and die there. If he wants to die at home, he must confess and apologize.
And expose those who hired him.

Who hired him? You mentioned the "Satanic elite" above. Whoever it was, it doesn't appear that they thought things through all that thoroughly.

Of course, Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan have been pretty much branded as "lone nuts" and crazed idiots, but if there was some larger conspiracy behind it, I can't imagine the people involved in it were really that much smarter or more rational than either Oswald or Sirhan Sirhan. Reckless stupidity and arrogant overconfidence seem to be something they all have in common.

In any case, Sirhan Sirhan probably won't get out of prison, even if he does apologize. Those who possibly might have hired him are probably already dead by now.

As for the Roosevelts...well...I can save FDR for acknowledging that he did very good with the New Deal and for fighting Nazism.
But Teddy Bear Roosevelt did anything to turn Central America into a colony.

That had been a longstanding expansionist goal for the U.S. and many politicians supported it or were enjoined to support it. Before the Civil War, it was just blatant "land acquisition," but after the Civil War and the North American continental borders were pretty much set, they had to take a different approach. During the Civil War, Napoleon III of France tried to set up a puppet/vassal state in Mexico, as the U.S. was unable to intercede or prevent it at the time. It quickly fizzled out, but there was this idea that if the U.S. did not implement some sort of hegemonic, imperialistic relationship with Latin America, then some other power might have. The French were also exploring the idea of building a canal in the Isthmus of Panama, so that was likely an impetus towards the U.S. pushing towards that goal. The basic logic is "If we don't do it, someone else will."

The whole world was on a pretty aggressive and predatory footing overall. So, Teddy Roosevelt and FDR may have been just responding to the world situation as it was dealt to them and making decisions they felt to be in the best interests of the United States. They were Presidents, not Popes.

 

[metis]

I do believe that Trump was one of the absolute worst American presidents on a domestic level, for sure. His COVID response alone was a major disgrace.

I disagree-- I think he was the worst as he was and is as dishonest as the day is long.

 

[Colt]

I can't take this chart seriously.
I mean...Kennedy is surpassed by the Freemasons Roosevelts?

Please...this is spitting on JFK's grave.

First place: Kennedy
Second place: Lincoln

The last two places: the two Roosevelts preceded by some unspeakable Freemasonic stuff.

Notice that the slaves owners are in the top 15!

 

[Estro Felino]

Based on some of the viewpoints which were prevalent at the time, there were quite a few who likely believed that communism and the USSR were "Satanic," implying that anyone who was too soft or appeared to be sympathizing with the plight of the poor, disadvantaged, or downtrodden, was also "Satanic." The turn of Cuba towards the Soviet sphere of influence, along with the Cuban Missile Crisis, probably scared the bejesus out of a lot of people, which could have led some people to believe that if JFK wasn't neutralized, the US could be invaded or even nuked. I can see where some might have been convinced that it was a matter of life or death for the United States of America.

Who was terrified of Soviet Communism?
The greedy bankers who were terrified of losing their assets.
Not certainly the American middle class. Or the proletariat.

Who hired him? You mentioned the "Satanic elite" above. Whoever it was, it doesn't appear that they thought things through all that thoroughly.

Of course, Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan have been pretty much branded as "lone nuts" and crazed idiots, but if there was some larger conspiracy behind it, I can't imagine the people involved in it were really that much smarter or more rational than either Oswald or Sirhan Sirhan. Reckless stupidity and arrogant overconfidence seem to be something they all have in common.

There were at least 11 bullets on the crime scene. Sirhan's gun could fire 8 of them at most.

In any case, Sirhan Sirhan probably won't get out of prison, even if he does apologize.

That's a relief.

Those who possibly might have hired him are probably already dead by now.

I know they are. Eight circle, fifth bolgia.

That had been a longstanding expansionist goal for the U.S. and many politicians supported it or were enjoined to support it. Before the Civil War, it was just blatant "land acquisition," but after the Civil War and the North American continental borders were pretty much set, they had to take a different approach. During the Civil War, Napoleon III of France tried to set up a puppet/vassal state in Mexico, as the U.S. was unable to intercede or prevent it at the time. It quickly fizzled out, but there was this idea that if the U.S. did not implement some sort of hegemonic, imperialistic relationship with Latin America, then some other power might have. The French were also exploring the idea of building a canal in the Isthmus of Panama, so that was likely an impetus towards the U.S. pushing towards that goal. The basic logic is "If we don't do it, someone else will."

The whole world was on a pretty aggressive and predatory footing overall. So, Teddy Roosevelt and FDR may have been just responding to the world situation as it was dealt to them and making decisions they felt to be in the best interests of the United States. They were Presidents, not Popes.

Imperialism needs horrific war and war crimes.
Nothing has changed, since they are trying to extradite Assange.
They want him in America, and some hideous criminal will stage a fake suicide or something.

His guilt? He exposed the crimes of the elitist cabal of warmongers.

 

[Estro Felino]

In my opinion, in recent history at least, Reagan, Clinton, Bush Jr and Trump should be on the bottom of the list.

Reagan and Clinton destroyed the middle class and may well have ushered in the end of the US economy. While Bush Jr attacked and invaded two sovereign countries because he was too stupid to say no to Cheney, who was just looking to make himself and all his old cronies at Halliburton billionaires. And Trump ignored a global pandemic, then tried to overthrow our democracy when he got 'fired' for it.

Obama deserves sainthood, right?
Libya and Syria destroyed.
If you believe that the warlike attitude is wrong, the most horrific wars were fought because of the Obama's administration.