Your choices for best U.S. Presidents are?

I'd put up my choices, but I think I'll wait a while so I don't influence others and don't start the arguments about my choices too soon

George Washington -- An able leader without whose help we could NOT have won the revolution, and who recognized the corrupting influence of power to the degree that he stepped down after two terms, setting a precedent that was recognized for almost 150 years.

Theodore Roosevelt -- A conservationist who was powerful yet persuasive, who had the sense to know what to do to keep us out of war. A little looney on the personal level, but a great leader.

Thomas Jefferson -- A great statesman, a powerful leader and one who set the philosophical precedent for limited government.

There are few other presidents who even come close to these leaders' level, IMEABO.

Thomas Jefferson - He wrote this country!  Well almost, he was by far the most intelligent and well rounded of the founding fathers.

Ronald Reagan - He made us proud to be American Again, and dragged us out of the Carter malaise.

James Monroe - The Monroe Doctrine - Need I say more?

I think it will always be "least worst" and not best. It's like saying "who is the best janitor?" If a janitor does his job, you really don't ever have to think about the janitor.

In the same way, I think the presidents who do the best job are the ones who make it seem like, well, we're in charge. I don't like presidents that are sweeping in their leadership. I also don't like them neglecting us to the point that the crap piles up.

So, I guess it is like God tells Bender in Futurama. When you do things right, no one will know you did anything at all.

Some interesting choices above.

I'd say I definitely agree with Jefferson.  As noted, his work in writing the constitution and Declaration of Independence helped put us on the path to becoming these United States.

 

I see Dr Guy has included Reagan, and I'd agree to a large extent there.  Modern era, I think he was most certainly one of the best, if not the best, given the state of the nation when he took over.  I can't say I wasn't scared about his leadership when he was first elected as many people felt he would get us into a war over just about anything, with anyone.  He had the cowboy reputation and seemed so relatively unpredictable, you expected that at just about anytime he actually would hit the button and start the strike against the Soviets.  But... over time, throughout his Presidency, and looking back later, you realize that he was the great communicator, and he did pull the country out of the Carter mess.  Even the *thought* that Reagan was coming into office was enough to scare the Iranians into releasing the hostages they had been holding.

He was able to make massive changes, for the good, to our economy.  His tax reform plans fueled one of the greatest expansions ever in the history of the world.  And his build-up of the military helped push the Soviets towards bankruptcy and rushed the decline of the U.S.S.R. and the rise of Russia and the separate former Soviet nations.

 

I could add Kennedy to my modern era list for some things, most noticably the inspiration to get to the moon, and the challenge to the citizens of the country to ask not....   He had many personal issues, was in many ways a slimeball in the example of Clinton, Bill, in his personal life,  but he was also a leader in other areas.  He'd be seen as a conservative in these modern times, though he ran as a Democrat.

 

One more I would list is Lincoln.  He led the nation through the civil war, and worked to keep the nation together and bring it back together following the war.  His words that we now see as the Gettysburg address were so simple, and yet so powerful, and so few at the same time.  He was never seen as a communicator, and yet he was in many, many ways.

See, I disagree horribly with Lincoln. I like the end result, but I don't like how he got there. He basically threw away the Constitution to preserve the union.

To be fair, the question arises as to whether there was any other way to hold the country together, and I can't say that there was. But by the time Lincoln's tenure was through, the ideals of Jeffersonian democracy were all but finished on the American political landscape.

As for Kennedy, I can't mark him as among the best or the worst. I believe his tenure was too short to be sure. Civil Rights had begun long before he took office (as, in all fairness, had the Vietnam War). If I were handing out grades for presidents, Kennedy would have received an "incomplete".

Agreed



Agreed

i'm surprised to see more haven't touted john adams. he tends to be the darling of the right, esp the religious right. and since this sight does tend to at the very least, "lean" right....i thought i'd see a few tributes to him. but regardless of whom anyone picks, there will always be the "counter -argument."


as for a couple of my own picks...i think FDR would be at the top for me. the new deal brought us out of the depression. he lifted a nation up when it was destitute (like others have as well) but unlike others, didn't squander it. he was a "reluctant warrior" but acted when it was time. there's more, but i want to keep it brief.

for another at the top, i would go with the obvious, george washington. for reasons most sudents of history are familiar with. just like vince lombardi will remain at the top of the "great coaches" in the nfl list, despite whomever else comes along. washington set a high standard for all his successors and it is because of his leadership and vision beyond his own power that this great experiment was given a chance to work.

and one i didn't see mentioned...james madison. called the "father of the constitution." wrote the bill of rights. rallied a young america to defeat the 2nd british invasion in 1812. big proponent of limited federal power. etc, etc...and if ya can't like him for that. was the 1st president that stopped wearing those silly looking knee britches and began wearing long pants.

and my jury is still out with lincoln. i'm reading team of rivals now (have been, off and on for months now,,,it's a slow read). when i finish it, i'm sure i'll have some more definitive opinions and some reshaped ones. it's a really interesting book, just so damn detailed, it's very slow.

but "the world is flat" was like that too somewhat, and that was the best thing i read in at least 5 years.