Today is Presidents’ Day in the USA…who is best U. S. President of all time?

[Anonymous]

Mount Rushmore National Memorial

Reference links:
https://www.nps.gov/moru/index.htm
https://www.history.com/topics/holidays/presidents-day
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/experts-rank-the-best-us-presidents-of-all-time/ss-BB1etDnV#image=31

George Washington

Thomas Jefferson

Theodore Roosevelt

Abraham Lincoln

Franklin Roosevelt

Ronald Reagan

Other - I think another U. S. President is the greatest, I don’t care, I’m not an American, etc.

Updates

+1 y

For those who provide/have provided an opinion, please also cast a vote in the poll

[nightdrot]

Unquestionably Abraham Lincoln. While the other Presidents - and I am a Reagan fan -on the list had defining accomplishments and are of undoubted historical importance, none was as decisive and significant as Lincoln, who not only saved the Union in its darkest hour, he defined its very nature.

Indeed, some years back a group of historians rated Lincoln and Churchill not just as great national leaders, but as the greatest leaders in all Western civilization. They earned the accolade - to be sure an accolade not without controversy - because they recurred to very wellsprings of Western civilization to define their statecraft and preserve their societies.

To some degree, this is an observation with a speculative cast. We can only imagine how the Western world would have looked had the United States not survived its civil war. (Ditto had Britain not stood alone and survived in 1940-41.) However, even in a contemporaneous context, Lincoln stands out.

At the time Lincoln became President, it was not just that the country was divided on the question of slavery - with all of its implications for how man viewed his fellow man. The country was, significantly, divided over its very nature. The question of whether or not it was single national community, or instead a confederation of separate and distinct communities, each with their own identity and, in extremis, sovereignty.

Lincoln answered the question not just through military victory - which by itself would not have been enduring - but by summoning the nation to the philosophical essentials of its birth. He defined the nation by common attachment to a specific creed - "a nation dedicated to a proposition" - and in the fullness of time defined the nation.

No President - not even Washington nor Jefferson - answered the question of what the United States was, and thus what it is now, as permanently and definitively. By summoning "the mystic chords of memory," i. e. to a keener sense of its animating principles, Lincoln turned the country into a nation. Something much more essential and elemental and thus enduring.

Not perfectly or completely to be sure. There is no perfection in this mortal veil of tears. However, it is undeniable that had their been no Lincoln, there would have been no America, and had there been no America, the history of Western civilization going forward - with all of its promise of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law - would have looked very different and likely would have taken a far darker turn.

[Asker]

Wow, what a great response.

[nightdrot]

Thanks so much.

[Asker]

You’re welcome

[BCA6010]

I wonder how many people voted for Teddy, but wouldn't also vote for the likes of Otto Von Bismarck as a world leader, since Teddy basically copied his foreign policy and even much of his personal image.

Washington wouldn't have been my choice 10 years ago, but considering that he not only fought for the country's existence, went on to be the only sitting president to accompany troops into combat, and actually refused to join a political party or seize power for himself when it was offered, there really isn't anyone else to compare him to because nobody else is in the same league.

FDR would rank very low. He gets credit entirely for being in the right place at the right time; he did remarkably little of value in office for someone who served two terms let alone just shy of four. Truman was better in pretty much every way.

[Asker]

Yeah we sure were fortunate to have Washington lead the USA in war & peace.

Thanks for submitting your opinion.

[ADFSDF1996]

• Reagan
• JFK
• Teddy

[Asker]

So you voted for Reagan in the poll to this question?

[ADFSDF1996]

Since he’s number 1 on the list yeah.

[Aerissa_Jade]

Of that list, probably George Washington or Maybe Reagan. As FDR was a major socialist, created SS as a Ponzi scheme, that needs more people putting in than pulling out. He also signed Executive Order 9066 that arrested Japanese Americans and put them into internment camps.

I don't know how anyone can think someone who suspended the rights of American citizens, strictly based on race could be considered a good president.

Teddy is pretty good, but he got the antiquities act, which in concept is a good idea but Democratic presidents have vastly abused it making millions of acres of land federal property and stealing it from states, especially out west as retribution against conservative states.

When the US government owns more than half of states out west, it shows just how out of control they are. No eastern states would ever allow them to own half of them.

It would of been better, had it been limited in size and frequency. Back then though, the thought of presidents abusing it was not understood how polarized things would become in the future.

Lincoln, is the only dictator the US has ever had... he arrested people and held them without trial, many had no reason to be arrested. He also ignored the judiciary when told to release them or bring charges.

Arresting US citizens without cause because they might support the south.

Many also think he freed the slaves, but the emancipation proclamation only freed the slaves in the states currently in revolt, not the border states that were not part of the confederation.

I know people can overlook that he was a dictator because it was a time of war, and he did ultimately lie through his teeth to get the 13th amendment ratified, which also resulted in the war lasting longer because of his lies.

A dictator is someone who arrests citizens without charge and holds them indefinitely.

I can't say a dictator could ever be one of the best presidents ever.

[Asker]

Thanks for your detailed & thoughtful comments!

[Asker]

Oh…did you vote Washington or Reagan in the poll?

[Aerissa_Jade]

Washington

[Asker]

👌👍

[Stoner710]

George Washington, Lincoln is definitely a very very very close second. The reason why I think Washington was the best president ever is because he said the president of two terms he also at a point where he could have Become the literal king of the United States and have ruled until his death he decided to take two terms and step down what he got done during his presidency wasn’t all that exciting to be honest but when it was time for him to step down after two terms used up down. Lincoln was the first republican president of the United States he fight a Civil War in order to fulfill the writings down in the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal and died very early in his second term due to assassination. Definitely the best president of the 20th century would probably be Reagan followed by FDR and teddy Roosevelt which is a bad ass teddy Franklin Delano Roosevelt I’ll give him that he was a great war time president and he had won the most famous quotes of all time there is nothing to fear but fear itself was the American left House seem to abandoned bed during the great depression he was terrible there is a good argument because government is typically terrible as job that he prolonged the great depression by eight years he was good during World War II but Washington was the greatest president because he said a President in my opinion

[NamerOfStars]

It's hard to know how to quantify it, but I'd go with Washington: the only president, aside from Polk, to fulfill ALL his campaign promises, and who managed to hold together the fledgling country when under most people, it would've broken apart. Plus, he had the brains to back down and go home after two terms; no trying to become a king for him.

Lincoln gets WAY too much credit, considering that he DID try to become king, or at least dictator; if the envelope with General Order-191 hadn't been found, Gettysburg never would've happened, Lee would've crossed the Susquehanna and laid siege to Washington. This probably would've won the Confederacy diplomatic recognition from England and France, and forced Lincoln to sue for peace. In any case, if the war had been lost, he would've been brought up on charges of Malfeasance of Office, if not outright treason- frankly, he should have been anyway. The Constitution is NOT a polite suggestion.

[Asker]

I looked up General Order-19, but how did Lincoln “try to become king, or at least dictator”?

[NamerOfStars]

By suspending habeus corpus and other key Constitutional provisions, and pushing Congress to institute federal battle slavery, which was, indirectly, the entire thing the war of 1812 was about.

[MrtoddsWildRide]

Most people don't know as much about Lincoln as they should. He won the Republican nomination through deal in an actual smoke filled back room.
Had he not been assassinated, he would have lost in the next election. His policies on reconstruction were hated in the North and the South still hated him for Sherman's March. That's why anytime I see people argue that a President is great using approval ratings, I laugh because I know that they probably admire Lincoln too.

[NamerOfStars]

@MrtoddsWildRide Well said.

[Asker]

@namerofstars
Thank you for your informed opinion.

I found this article about suspending the writ of habeas corpus…

www.history.com/.../president-lincoln-suspends-the-writ-of-habeas-corpus-during-the-civil-war

[zagor]

Not true. The North had a vast military advantage over the South, and Lee's forces couldn't have lasted for long in the unfriendly territory of the North. They did not have the supply lines or the numbers for a sustained Northern campaign, and there were enough troops guarding D. C. to have held off the rebs until the main Union forces arrived, which would have been disastrous for Lee's army.

[DizzyDesii]

Oh gosh none. I’ll take The guy from Scary Movie 4

https://www.youtube.com/embed/iFm-KZgioX8

[TheSpaceGnome]

I was going to type jfk, then I saw this, this is better.

Also peepee finger.

I have spoken.

[DizzyDesii]

@TheSpaceGnome 😂😂

[Kaneki05]

JFK especially if he didn't die and his plans for the poor went through which would of brought a form of socialism to USA (Probably the reason he was killed if we get into a conspiracy theory).
And of course Reagan on the opposite end of views as the worst.

[Asker]

What is it that JFK did (instead of planned) that makes him the “best” President?

And what s it that Reagan did that makes him the “worst” President?

[Kaneki05]

Oh i made a mistake of thinking Reagan was Nixon. Still really dislike Reagan from what I can remember but honestly I need to go check up what he did again. So yea I meant Nixon was the worst president not Reagan.
Reasons for this is JFK stopped Nixon which was a win in my book already, JFK was very much pro about separation of church and state which America should have always been so but yet still isn't. Of course my major respect goes to when he stated I am democratic president not a Catholic President as in to say he just so happens to be Catholic but that will not bring Bias into his leadership.
JFK had very much understanding of social issues and very progressive for his time. He did not want war which cannot be said about other presidents. Kennedy always seemed to be put into uncomfortable war situations that he did not want and honestly he showed signs of been unprepared for that, some may call that a bad thing but honestly i think it can say more about the leader when they are and can go to more extreme lengths.
The food and medicine sent to cuban government to save the captured after the bay of pigs was a good sign of this. And the bay of pigs it's self was approved by Kennedy but from what I've read it don't sound like Kennedy had much to do with the in's and outs of it and someone else pulled the triggers on that. So I cannot blame him for that.

Now as for Nixon? Well I don't really need to explain why he was bad lol. As for Reagan after a quick look up who he was again yeah just a simple point to something like Trump which is why I don't like either and people who like Trump most likely like Reagan for same reasons. Quote on Quote "Tax cuts"
Anyone with a brain or simply google can look into why Trump and Reagan just so happened to run their campaign and story and whole character based on been the "I cut Taxes guy" and what one will find is it's not for good hearted reasons or helps those who need it.

[Kaneki05]

"Over all, the 1982 tax increase undid about a third of the 1981 cut; as a share of GDP, the increase was substantially larger than Mr. Clinton's 1993 tax increase." According to historian and domestic policy adviser Bruce Bartlett, Reagan's tax increases throughout his presidency took back half of the 1981 tax cut.
Yet people still like him for cutting tax's guy and overlook other things he did.

[Asker]

You confused Reagan with Nixon…hmm…ok.

You probably should read some more about the Cold War, the Berlin Wall, and the Soviet Union and the end/fall of these.

Concerning tax cuts and certain Presidents being a “tax cut guy,” see what the JFK Library says about President Kennedy…

www.jfklibrary.org/.../john-f-kennedy-on-the-economy-and-taxes

“The president finally decided that only a bold domestic program, including tax cuts, would restore his political momentum…the president proposed in 1963 to cut income taxes from a range of 20-91% to 14-65% He also proposed a cut in the corporate tax rate from 52% to 47%. Ironically, economic growth expanded in 1963, and Republicans and conservative Democrats in Congress insisted that reducing taxes without corresponding spending cuts was unacceptable. Kennedy disagreed, arguing that “a rising tide lifts all boats” and that strong economic growth would not continue without lower taxes.”

[Kaneki05]

I think there is a lot of differences there between that cut and the reason to why Reagan and Trump did it. Along with even further proof of Kennedy's intentions with his plans for the poor.

[Kaneki05]

I know a lot about Cold war and etc and presidents just a name confusion really. I am still quite informed of why I am against who and why and who pro. And Cold war was interesting overall tho I do much prefer to look at the Russian side with that and the stuff people tend to actually not inform themselves on more.

[AviatorTom]

Most historians consider Abraham Lincoln the best President, having to deal with the Civil War to maintain the Union together, and emancipating slaves,. I agree with that, with George Washington (ensured the President was not a King), Thomas Jefferson (Louisiana Purchase) and Franklin Delano Roosevelt (dealing with the Great Depression) in a tie for second place.

[Asker]

Don’t forget “primary author of the Declaration of Independence” for Thomas Jefferson.

[AviatorTom]

@gagname Yes, but he did that before he became President. His Presidency was mainly about expanding US territory. Louisiana Purchase and its associated Lewis and Clark expedition are the main ones.

[Asker]

Oh yes @aviatortom, very true…

Thanks for getting me back on track regarding the “scope” my own “who is best U. S. President” question!

[Anonymous]

George Washington. Because he set the standard of what it means to be the president. He was our American "Cincinnatus". Why do we have two terms limit? Because of George Washington. He stopped after 2 terms because he was mindful of the precedence he was setting. He feared if he died while in office that Americans might view the presidency as a lifetime appt. We had just rid ourselves of a king and didn't want to see the presidency have that much power.
( yes I'm aware Roosevelt served 3)
But that's also why the 22 amendment was created just 3 years later following Roosevelt's death.

[Anonymous]

FDR. During WW2 he defeated the Nazis, Japanese, Italians, vichy French and in the process took possession of Western Europe, the British empire, French empire, Belgian empire, Dutch empire, Portuguese empire, some of the Japanese empire and made the US the major super power with the largest most powerful empire in history.
Of course Woodrow Wilson started this in WW1, by taking all that gold for arms from the British and french.
Currently only China, Iran, Russia, India and North Korea are outside the US control and influence.

[Godsvengeance]

You referenced maybe two of my bottom three presidents (the other being LBJ).

[Opinion Owner]

@Godsvengeance don't know why. They built the US Empire. The only country that can claim they won in WW1&2 is the US.

[Godsvengeance]

That's why. I have no interest in the American Empire. I wish we had just stayed a free market economy and stayed away from death and destruction that has since completely bankrupted us and set us up for the coming inflationary depression (different and much worse than the deflationary depression that FDR elongated with his unconstitutional policies in the 1930s)

[Opinion Owner]

@Godsvengeance your dreaming. It enriched this nation far beyond what we could ever have hoped for.

[Godsvengeance]

That's just objectively false. We won those wars because we had insane resources and manufacturing capabilities but we responded to those wins by squandering both. What we are just starting to see now is just the tip of the iceberg that is to come and it's all because of our goal of having an empire. There was no reason why we couldn't have won those wars and then just headed home and continued on the path that had brought us those victories (the old if it ain't broke, don't fix it approach) but instead we got greedy and the next decade or so will be our punishment

[Opinion Owner]

@Godsvengeance no that's how we won the war partly with insane resources but we won in WW2. Britain lost an empire in ww2 and was still rationing food tens years after, Russia though gained Eastern Europe was basically a bomb crater and broke, Japan italy and Germany became US protectorates, France lost its empire. Britain only finished paying its ww1&2 war debt in 1999. We were left as not only the largest economic industrial country but really the only one with no competition.
The US is super wealthy and economically powerful but the trouble is ordinary working people no longer see the fruits of that wealth. US companies extract huge wealth from foreign countries yet our infrastructure is rotting.

[Godsvengeance]

That's because we got greedy and began focusing on the rest of the world (due to those presidents) instead of the homefront

[Opinion Owner]

@Godsvengeance we have a free market economy, its just inevitably somebody rises to the top to control everything.

[Godsvengeance]

If that happens (which it has), that's proof we don't have a free market economy. Government is always waste so the bigger the government the more waste. That's how we developed so quickly and effectively during the Industrial Revolution. Ot started in England but did more in the US because we had less interference from government. The presidents you listed (and LBJ) are the ones who ruined that great system and set us up for what will be the worst decade in American history

[Opinion Owner]

@Godsvengeance free market means free market. Of you can't compete because the bigger guy does it better and cheaper doesn't mean its not a free market.
The problem in Britain wasn't the government it was still operating with a serf system, lords owned everything. 1in3 people were in service, servants can't afford to buy things. America created opportunity, even in the earliest days immigrants from Europe couldn't believe when they got here the opportunity for business, they could farm, hunt fish and succeed on the sweat of their own brow

[Godsvengeance]

The current US system is absolutely nowhere near a free market. Our economic system is fascistic as on paper people can own their businesses but the government controls what those businesses can and can't do. That's not free market. Free market is like a yard sale. No regulation whatsoever

[Opinion Owner]

@Godsvengeance what your talking about would leave the US like a central or south American country

[Godsvengeance]

What makes us any different other than we have more natural resources and we pretend to be free market?

[Bel88]

Mr. Anonymous - It was the USSR that defeated the Nazis you silly goose.

[Godsvengeance]

@Bel88 I know it's fashionable to shit on America, but to just pretend that the USSR beat the Germans on their own is just ridiculous. If the Americans weren't pulled into the war by the Japanese, there's a good chance the British would have abandoned the war and the Americans would have never joined and reopened the Western front. If the Germans weren't fighting wars in all directions and could focus all their attention on fighting the USSR, they would have prevailed. Similarly, if the Germans weren't fighting the USSR on the Eastern front, the Americans would have likely failed at taking over Italy and failed at the Normandy invasion. Both the US and the USSR were necessary to defeat Nazi Germany

[Opinion Owner]

@Bel88 the USSR lost the most lives, did the most brutal fighting but it was the US that was the architect of it all and its no coincidence that the US emerged the winner of two world wars. For the rest of the allies it was a pyhric victory, for the us a case of to the victor go the spoils.
Let's not forget the US supplied the USSR the resources it needed to win, the British to a lesser while stopping the Germans from having the resources they needed to win in Russia, while fighting in North africa, scily, Italy, France, islands In south Pacific, Burma, China, in the North Atlantic, fighting the largest naval battles in history in the Pacific, supplying the Chinese...

[Opinion Owner]

@Godsvengeance the British were never going to abandon the war against Germany, they were still holding their own and had been in a similar situation against napoleon before. Germany in 1940 had missed the opportunity to finish Britain off and with the British stopping global trade to Germany it needed to invade Russia for the resources it needed to survive. Britain on the other hand had no shortage of resources or manpower, it had one of the largest empires in history.
What interesting about Russian victory in the east is how much is owed to America giving aid.
427,284 trucks
400,000 jeeps and trucks
12,000 armored vehicles
35,170 motorcycles
7000 shermans &Lee tanks
11,000 aircraft
2,670,371 tons of petroleum products
Boots for every single Russian soldier
Food for every single Russian soldier
1,911 steam locomotives
66 diesel locomotives,
9,920 flat cars, 1,000 dump cars
An entire tyre factory shipped whole from the US to Russia.
53% of all red army ammunition, artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives.
Built them an entire rail infrastructure
Built them a complete communications network
Thousands of radio sets for tanks and aircraft
The list goes on and on.

The British gave not as much but a lot when they needed it at one British tanks represented 40% of the tanks the red army had.
3,000+ Hurricane aircraft
4,000+ other aircraft
27 naval vessels
5,218 tanks (including 1,380 Valentines from Canada)
5,000+ anti-tank guns
4,020 ambulances and trucks
323 machinery trucks (mobile vehicle workshops equipped with generators and all the welding and power tools required to perform heavy servicing)
1,212 Universal Carriers and Loyd Carriers (with another 1,348 from Canada)
1,721 motorcycles
£1.15bn ($1.55bn) worth of aircraft engines
1,474 radar sets
4,338 radio sets
600 naval radar and sonar sets
Hundreds of naval guns
15 million pairs of boots

[Bel88]

@Godsvengeance The USSR was winning the war long before the first US soldier set foot in Europe. The turning point came in 1942, not June 1944.

[Opinion Owner]

@Bel88 yes because the US government gave them enough tanks guns, bullets, bombs, planes, lorries, trains, fuel, food, radios to do so. Enough that they could have field 2 more US armies in Normandy. The Turning point came in 1942, yeah December 7 1941 you mean. A year later thanks to the US the Russians had the Germans beat at stalingrad. Thanks to the US the Russians were better armed, equipped and fed than the Germans all while attacking German industry, infrastructure and supply chains.

[captain_voidwalker]

Thomas Jefferson is bar non the best 2nd would be trump, 3rd would be Eisenhower.

The worst president are #1 Franklin D Roosevelt, fuck him into perpetuity for the shit show that was social security.
2nd Worst would be Woodrow Wilson for the federal reserve act, nothing like handing our economy over to a bunch of corrupt banksters. 3rd worst would be a tie between Barack Obama and Joe biden, for completely gutting our industry and leaving our infrastructure to rot.

[Asker]

Why do you think Thomas Jefferson is the best President?…

He did a lot of notable things, like being the “primary author of the Declaration of Independence” but (as @aviatortom reminded me) that was before he was President.

[josephinelcajon]

Jimmy Carter life is amazing! His entire life has been dedicated to help others and has done more after his term than any other! Yes he was not perfect (no one is) He tried and continues to at 97!

[josephinelcajon]

www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/carter/

[Asker]

He has helped a lot of people in his life.
Unfortunately he was a weak & lackluster President and his term didn’t yield positive results for the American people.

[Anonymous]

I don't know. I just wonder how many idiots will say Trump.

[Asker]

Probably as many people that think you’re one too.

[888theGreat]

no, she is just a coward

[ShadezMcgee]

I will say the best ones in my eyes are Lincoln, Washington, Eisenhower, Reagan, Teddy Roosevelt, and Trump.

[Asker]

Looks like you have the “Big 5” Republican Presidents in your list…

www.thetoptens.com/greatest-republican-presidents/

[ShadezMcgee]

And that matters why? I just feel these ones not only stood out the most, but had the biggest impact. I would have put Kennedy, but he didn't get to finish his Presidency.

[Asker]

It was just an observation.
I saw some noted Republicans in your list, so I was curious who people thought were the best or greatest Republican Presidents, so I looked that up online.

[Asker]

How did you vote in the poll to this question—which one President did you pick as the best?

[BipBipLeddus]

Teddy Roosevelt, 100%

He was nearsighted with asthma but he was still an ass-kicking western bro.

[Asker]

Obviously everyone is aware of TR wearing glasses, but you saying he was nearsighted made me look that up…

https://www.nps.gov/thri/theodorerooseveltbio.htm

[BipBipLeddus]

It was mentioned I think once in my 8th grade history class, but never mentioned again. The asthma was brought up, but not the nearsightedness.

I don't know why I've retained that one tidbit of knowledge this long.

[Asker]

Ok. Very cool @bipbipleddus

[abc3643]

FDR
Washington
Lincoln

the others are wannabees.

[Asker]

So your placed your vote for FDR?

[abc3643]

Yes, but Washington was a close second and Lincoln not far behind that.

[Asker]

Ok. To you, why is FDR a better President than Washington?

[abc3643]

That's easy.
FDR was President during the two of the 4 greatest existential threats to the USA:
The Great Depression and WW 2.

The policies and decisions he made kept the country and the free world alive.
You don't get elected to 4 terms being an idiot.

And the 22nd Amendment was created to prevent that again because, well, the GOP had a rough time not having a president for 20 years. The amendment was initiated by GOP representative Earl C. Michener in the House and GOP Senator Robert A. Taft in the Senate.

Had the 22nd Amendment been in place at the onset of WW 2, we might be speaking German.

=====
Washington was a good President for setting precedents. For instance, addressing the Whiskey Rebellion and declining a third term. But, also, simply getting the country operational under the US Constitution was vitally important. That was another great existential crisis.

Lincoln was during the Civil War, the 4th great existential crisis. His assertion of the indivisible union - backed up by the US Supreme Court - was critical to keeping the nation alive then and forever after. It reiterates that we are a federation, not a confederation. Historically, confederations always eventually fall apart and/or are worthless at getting things done. That's WHY we transitioned from a confederation to a federation. Lincoln also did what was necessary in November 1862 - firing McClellan - and eventually brought in Grant and Sherman to do what was necessary to end the war.

encyclopediavirginia.org/.../...cdbabf859d87a.jpeg

[Asker]

Thank you for providing a very thoughtful response with many details.

[MrtoddsWildRide]

I'm sorry, but FDR's involvement prolonged the Depression. That has been well researched and documented among economists.
He also gave us the Alphabet Agencies that damaged our economy greatly and continue to do so to this day. Again, economists have studied this and the findings are clear.
His attempt to pack the Supreme Court was one of the most naked grabs for power in our history.
Social Security that he introduced is a disaster.
His Supreme Court picks were all activist judges that twisted the meaning of words, the Constitution and logic beyond reason and were all very proud of it.
He was at least smart enough to get out of the way of the generals and not hobble the army in WWII though, so there is that, Otherwise if you want to know why so much income disparity and crony capitalism exists, look straight at your number one choice, because he set the stage for that to happen.

[abc3643]

@MrtoddsWildRide While there was a problem that did extend the Depression a bit, the fact that FDR did ANYTHING is a world of improvement over the do-nothing GOP with Herbert Hoover. The Great Depression began in his first year as President and only got worse because of his hands-off approach. That's why he was a one-termer.

FDR, in many ways, created the modern America in which government is an important part of people's lives because, but the 20th Century, it had to be.

[abc3643]

Not to totally piss on the GOP, but Eisenhower was a pretty good President and, in many ways, Richard Nixon was too.

[MrtoddsWildRide]

"FDR, in many ways, created the modern America in which government is an important part of people's lives because, but the 20th Century, it had to be."-That's the problem. It didn't have to be, but it forced it's way in and now people don't know how to live without it. It's a lot like hoe crack addicts don't know how to live without that.
The depression was caused when the Federal Reserve failed. It wasn't Hoover.
https://youtu.be/EY-HYUFlCPs

[humanearth]

Kennedy
I believe he was our last true president

[Asker]

I don’t agree, but I’ll like it and give you a point anyways.

[normalice]

I suspect a hundred years from now Trump will be the president known for tossing a hand grenade into the country and Biden will be the president known for throwing himself on top of that hand grenade.

But for now Biden is known as the guy who got his old stinky viscera all over the place.

[Flower7]

Abraham Lincoln. He seemed to have a lot of morals.

[Asker]

“Honest Abe.”

[Heartache0405]

I’d say it’s a tie between Washington, Lincoln, and Reagan

[Asker]

Break the tie…who’s #1?

[Heartache0405]

Trump

[yesthisisNicholas]

Surely there positives in Carter and Nixon and even Ford? 🤩🤩🤩

[Asker]

Yes, but I don’t think any of these men are on anybody’s “Top Ten US Presidents” list.

[yesthisisNicholas]

Oh ,🥲🥲😅😅

[yesthisisNicholas]

I think they're both cool

[Asker]

It’s nice for a leader to be “cool,” but it’s so much better that their policies lead to “positive results.”