T Nation

American Presidential Rankings


#1

The Brookings Institution conducted a poll of several hundred members of the American Political Science Association with expertise in the American presidency.


#2

[quote]Bismark wrote:
The Brookings Institution conducted a poll of several hundred members of the American Political Science Association with expertise in the American presidency.

[/quote]

To be fair no current President should be fully evaluated against all past Presidents until his term is up. Obama may actually do something right over the next 14 months or so which could keep him from being in last place. Hold on, he had Osama Bin Laden Killed so he did do one thing correctly so far.

I really enjoyed reading the following:

This proves that it is really difficult to fool the American public over the long-term. I suspect that the 33% who found him to be the worst President will grow in a big way over time.


#3

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:
The Brookings Institution conducted a poll of several hundred members of the American Political Science Association with expertise in the American presidency.

[/quote]

To be fair no current President should be fully evaluated against all past Presidents until his term is up. Obama may actually do something right over the next 14 months or so which could keep him from being in last place. Hold on, he had Osama Bin Laden Killed so he did do one thing correctly so far.

I really enjoyed reading the following:

This proves that it is really difficult to fool the American public over the long-term. I suspect that the 33% who found him to be the worst President will grow in a big way over time.[/quote]

Well, the experts put Obama at 18/43, which seems about right. He’s hardly the worst of all time.


#4

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:
The Brookings Institution conducted a poll of several hundred members of the American Political Science Association with expertise in the American presidency.

[/quote]

To be fair no current President should be fully evaluated against all past Presidents until his term is up. Obama may actually do something right over the next 14 months or so which could keep him from being in last place. Hold on, he had Osama Bin Laden Killed so he did do one thing correctly so far.

I really enjoyed reading the following:

This proves that it is really difficult to fool the American public over the long-term. I suspect that the 33% who found him to be the worst President will grow in a big way over time.[/quote]

Well, the experts put Obama at 18/43, which seems about right. He’s hardly the worst of all time. [/quote]

Two problems with your statement:

  1. As I have already said it is too early to decide where Obama should rank. He may very well do something right. Then again he may continue to screw America as he has been doing. Still too early. I believe that he deserves to finish out his term as did the other Presidents he will be ranked against.

  2. “The experts” ha I want to know who these experts are, each of them and their backgrounds. I don’t trust the faceless nameless “experts”. Better you ask the 47 million people on food stamps and the 90 million people without jobs.

Bottom line there are plenty of ways to determine how low Obama should rank. What the “experts” think depends on their own political bent. However, I have noticed that the longer a President is away from office the more honest the “experts” become. Lets give this a decade. I am betting that over the span of 10-20 years the “experts” will rank Obama right down there with Andrew Johnson.


#5

[quote]Bismark wrote:
The Brookings Institution conducted a poll of several hundred members of the American Political Science Association with expertise in the American presidency.

[/quote]

I have only been a voting aged witness for two of them. If they aren’t the bottom two, the list is flawed or Millard Fillmore was a bigger dick than I thought.


#6

I think the ranking for Obama will get worse, primarily because presidents (regardless of party) inch up the rankings if an “era” follows in their wake. I have a hard time seeing it. Great presidents create/inspire political movement that extend beyond their administration. Obama did the opposite - he took an ascendant center-left movement and politically killed it. I don’t think his score ever recovers from that.

And it shouldn’t. And honest Democrats should be furious about it.


#7

Clinton 8 and Obama 18, lol…


#8

By the way they ranked Lyndon Baines Johnson number 12 and he was one of the worst Presidents that we’ve ever had. I would not rank him higher than 40. He escalated the Vietnam war causing tens of thousands of deaths. He also launched “The Great War on Poverty” costing the country billions and has been a total fiasco. It did nothing but raise the number of people in poverty and on welfare. When someone is paid to stay home many generally don’t try to work.

Another one, Bill Clinton ahead of Ronald Reagan? COME ON! Look Clinton was not a bad President but he was in no way better than Ronald Reagan, not foreign policy wise and certainly not domestically. As for acting like a leader that BJ that Clinton had in the Oval Office and then lying to the American people brought the Presidency to a new low.

These things along with some of the other rankings lead me to believe that a liberal group did the rankings and they are illegitimate.


#9

I called BS when I saw that George f-ing Washington was #2.


#10

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#11

[quote]pushharder wrote:
This poll was so bogus it was hardly worth any comment. I saw it several days ago and purposely didn’t post it.[/quote]

It isn’t bogus. Doesn’t mean I agree with all the rankings, but there’s no reasom to think this is a partisan hack job. Witness:

“Second, scholars seem to hold Barack Obama in high regard personally, but view his skills and performance as mediocre to poor. Few think of Obama as an excellent president, while many more rate his presidency quite low.”

Not exactly evidence of an irrational liberal bias.

I think Clinton is rated too high, but part of this survey was an assessment of individual skills, and Clinton no doubt got an enormous boost as a result.


#12

Why is Andrew Johnson so poorly regarded?


#13

[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
Why is Andrew Johnson so poorly regarded?[/quote]

Likely because he’s considered one of they most racist presidents in history.


#14

I’m just going to say it’s hilarious that Nixon, the man who can claim the biggest landslide victory in Presidential Election History, is in the 30’s there…

When, compared to the last couple POTUS’s, he appears to have a lot more integrity than the others. At least he had the integrity to quit, as someone corrupt should. Obama learns about his corruption on the news like “a regular Joe”.


#15

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I’m just going to say it’s hilarious that Nixon, the man who can claim the biggest landslide victory in Presidential Election History, is in the 30’s there…

When, compared to the last couple POTUS’s, he appears to have a lot more integrity than the others. At least he had the integrity to quit, as someone corrupt should. Obama learns about his corruption on the news like “a regular Joe”. [/quote]

It would be truly amazing to see the press go after Obama the way they did Nixon. Where would they even begin? Fast and Furious? NSA spying? Using the IRS as a weapon against conservative groups? There is more of course. But we don’t live in a country where black left wing Presidents have to worry about impeachment.


#16

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Using the IRS as a weapon against conservative groups? [/quote]

While I may not agree with your phrasing here, the point you’re making stands and is, in my opinion, one of the most significant and outlandish scandals that have happened in my lifetime.

Literal political persecution by a branch of government… And no one cares, shit the left will defend it. (Because they can’t think enough to imagine what happens when the shoe is on the other foot.)

If the IRS issue isn’t going to sink an administration… Then the whole experiment is over. If the people don’t care that government agencies can and will, key word here, WILL, target and harass you over your political affiliation…


#17

1984 was supposed to be fiction guys… Not a guide book.

Orwell wasn’t supposed to be Nostradamus.


#18

Lots of people on TV said Jackson was famously racist this summer when they were talking about women on money. But he’s pretty high on the list.

Some teacher taught us that Johnson stuck to his principles, and wouldn’t let the “Radical Republicans(?)” ( a bunch of corrupt dudes) pillage the South during Reconstruction. He was impeached because he wasn’t revenge oriented enough towards the former Confederates.


#19

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Using the IRS as a weapon against conservative groups? [/quote]

While I may not agree with your phrasing here, the point you’re making stands and is, in my opinion, one of the most significant and outlandish scandals that have happened in my lifetime.

Literal political persecution by a branch of government… And no one cares, shit the left will defend it. (Because they can’t think enough to imagine what happens when the shoe is on the other foot.)

If the IRS issue isn’t going to sink an administration… Then the whole experiment is over. If the people don’t care that government agencies can and will, key word here, WILL, target and harass you over your political affiliation… [/quote]

I was foolish enough to think that when Louis Lerner pleaded the 5th that they were going to grant her immunity and then continue up the ladder until they got to Obama. But…the ineffective republicans could not seem to pull it off. Unless of course I missed something.


#20

One can only imagine the outrage and how the press would be screaming if a Ted Cruz administration had been harassing left wing groups through the IRS. They would be calling for his immediate impeachment.