It's unfair that all three of the Americans near the bottom of the list are Republicans (Dan Quale, Warren Harding, Herbert Hoover). Besides, Carter's foreign policy was atrocious, and his presidency was certainly a lot worse than Hoover's.

The man is still alive and isn't an affirmed idiot (like Quayle). Furthermore, Abe Lincoln is pretty darn high--third. Perhaps Hoover can be replaced with Millard Fillmore or James Buchanan. I don't think either Carter or Hoover deserves the rap they get.

Anyway, there aren't any Dems on the list at all.

Buchanan would be a good choice, but I think he would have to go below Harding. Harding didn't have many poor policies - he just played a lot of poker, drank during prohibition, and the whole Teapot Dome scandal. Buchanan, on the other hand, failed to do anything to prevent the Civil War.

Buchanan would be a good choice, but I think he would have to go below Harding. Harding didn't have many poor policies - he just played a lot of poker, drank during prohibition, and the whole Teapot Dome scandal. Buchanan, on the other hand, failed to do anything to prevent the Civil War.

That's OK, then. Though I have to tell you, the average historian says that Harding is slightly worse than Buchanan, on the theory that while Buchanan was ineffectual, Harding was out-and-out corrupt, and while most people tend to view ineffectuality and indecision as disgusting, they aren't as revolting as corruption.

Personally I would take a corrupt president over a Buchanan any day. Historians have rated his failure to deal with the states' secession the worst mistake any president made.

Replace Nero with George Bush II.

Yes, Carter was an idiot. He's recently been busy trying to get Americans to doubt Isreal, the last country in the Middle East that DOES NOT hate America. Not exactly smart from my view of things.

Replace Nero with George Bush II.

Yes, Carter was an idiot. He's recently been busy trying to get Americans to doubt Isreal, the last country in the Middle East that DOES NOT hate America. Not exactly smart from my view of things.

I'm not going to argue with you. But know I think you're a superficial fool.

Replace Nero with George Bush II.

That would anger conservatives and thus be a bad marketing decision. Conservatives won't view Bush as a bad president until several years after his term is over. If Fireaxis releases a Civilization game in 2030 it wouldn't surprise me to see George W. Bush near the bottom.

Hoover definitely doesn't deserve to be that close to the bottom. He wasn't a very good president, but he was a brilliant engineer and a great humanitarian. He should probably be replaced with Buchanan or Johnson.

Replace Nero with George Bush II.

I'd say it's bad policy to judge someone when they still have two years left. Granted, I doubt he'll turn out to be a good president, but he might be able to achieve mediocrity.