Greatest President

Which one was the Greastest American President?

  • Washinton

    Votes: 6 11.3%
  • Jefferson

    Votes: 2 3.8%
  • Lincoln

    Votes: 11 20.8%
  • Teddy Roosevelt

    Votes: 1 1.9%
  • Franklin D. Roosevelt

    Votes: 11 20.8%
  • Reagan

    Votes: 8 15.1%
  • Bush (The eleder)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Clinton

    Votes: 7 13.2%
  • Other (please specify)

    Votes: 7 13.2%

  • Total voters
    53
Who qualifies as the "greatest" President depends on how you define the term. I chose to interpret it as who did the most good for the nation, and my vote goes to Lincoln on that basis.

Lincoln was a true American leader -- he never stopped thinking of the United States as "one nation, indivisible", and dedicated his life to making sure it stayed that way. His war plan was to provoke a quick surrender, not a series of bloody massacres. Unfortunately it took him a few years and much political maneuvering before he could find some generals who could accomplish this. Lincoln's plan for the Reconstruction was much less harsh than that of Johnson and the hard-liners who succeeded him. Lincoln wanted to re-admit the Southern states to the Union as soon as possible and make sure that everyone, north and south, accepted that the war was over and the country was one again. Had Lincoln not been assassinated, I think that the Southern states would have gotten much better treatment after the war, and we might not have all this nonsense today with people born a century after the war feeling that they've been wronged by the "Yankees".

All credit where it is due to Washington, who had to set the precedent as leader of a new nation based on untested principles, and acted quite admirably in doing so. But I think that Lincoln had the greater challenge. The nation could have chosen to let its rebellious states go, saving much bloodshed and getting rid of some people who many in the north would have been quite happy to do without. But that would have destroyed the precedent of the UNITED States of America, and weakened the legitimacy of the government. Lincoln saw that a united nation was worth the blood that had to be spilled, and he led the rest of the people to accept his vision and see it through to victory. And all of this against determined opposition. Washington's battles had all been fought by the time he became President -- he was elected without opposition, and very few people questioned his worthiness or his decisions. Lincoln faced not only the Confederacy, but many people in the Union states who opposed him on grounds ranging from opposition to the draft, to lack of sympathy for the slaves, to accusations of tyranny (Lincoln, like other war presidents, assumed virtually dictatorial power during the war), to opposition to his reconstruction policy.

f I had more time and energy, and if I were still in high school, I could make a term paper out of this. Suffice it to say that, of our many great Presidents, I think that Lincoln stands out as the greatest.

(Ironically, while Lincoln accomplished everything I so admire, my own ancestors weren't even Americans. But if he hadn't done what he did, who knows whether this country would even have been worth coming to?)
 
I'm going to say Woodrow Wilson. He tried to keep us out of WWI and then became a great leader when we were forced into it. What I like most about him is his name, and also his ideas that were ahead of their time. He proposed the 14 points, which would have been kind to Germany and perhaps could have prevented WWII. One of his ideas was the League of Nations, what the UN is now based on. Unfortuneately, it didn't work out too well because the United States, who created it, didn't even join it.

I think most of those presidents on your list were great, except for Bush. He was greedy. He killed thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians just to get oil.
 
I would think Franklin Delano Roosevelt would be a high-rated candidate.

No way the US public would vote a wheelchair-bound man nowadays...say's much about the man's courage.

A man who actually believed in liberty for all.

:cool:
 
Originally posted by rmsharpe
I hope the people that voted for Clinton were the ones that didn't know who any other president was...

Why is Clinton up there, and John F. Kennedy not? How about Harry Truman? Hoover?

Clinton was probably the worst president the U.S. has ever had...yes, even worse than Jimmy Carter.

I think you'd be suprised that many people outside of the USA
know much about the history of the states.

I agree that Clinton was a triumph of slime over subsatnce.
But all presidents have this quality in some degree...
 
Originally posted by CurtSibling
A man who actually believed in liberty for all.
Except for Japanese-Americans during WW2. :rolleyes:

I think FDR is highly over-rated... he is a perfect example of having a lot more ability to get the public behind him than actually executing sound policies. I suggest reading a more detailed account of his depression policies and how they may actually have extended/worsened it.
 
Well, You're the North American, FDR was your president...

(He didn't do hundreds of dead Axis and Allies many favours either, but that's war for you.)

The good-bad-ugliness of US Presidents is more a problem for you folks in the USA.

I'm from the UK and just giving an opinion.
 
Now, I don't know much about presidents, but I think all of this talk about Clinton being a horrible president is wrong. So what if he had an affair? As long as it doesn't effect his job, it doesn't really matter.

I voted for Lincoln. I think the United States was in just about as much trouble in the Civil War as the Revolution. But the thing that seperates Lincoln from Washington was that Washington was the leader of a country fighting for independence, and Lincoln was the leader of a country fighting for actual freedom(along with the unity of the country).

During the Revolution, pretty much the only 'oppressive' thing about Britain was that it placed unfair taxes on the Colonies, and unfairly used its military in America. But, as we know, many of the black slaves living in the south during the Civil War were quite badly oppressed. This is why I think Lincolns achievement was so much more significant than Washingtons.
 
Reagan was our best president by far. He actually made our military what it is today. Before the Reagan administration, the only real reason we were a superpower was becasue of our nukes. We're lucky that damnfool Carter didn't disband our entire army, the stupid peacenick. Reagan saved us from Carter's mistakes.
 
Ahhh... c'mon now! :vomit:

Presidents who should be taken off the list: Reagan, Bush, Clinton, maybe FDR, and just possibly Teddy Roosevelt.

Obviously some of you don't understand the significance some of these older presidents have had on our country.
 
Originally posted by Genuis
I think most of those presidents on your list were great, except for Bush. He was greedy. He killed thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians just to get oil.

Them's flamin' words!!! I don't particularly like him or his Jr. but I think he did a good job putting the smack down on Sadam.

CurtSibling
No way the US public would vote a wheelchair-bound man nowadays...say's much about the man's courage.

Amazingly enough, the public didn't know that he couldn't walk. In fact, no one outside his family and staff (and allies like Churchill) knew that he had ever had polio until he died in '45. When he would do public speechs, he would have his two sons prop him up so that it would look like he was walking under his own power with his sons holding his hands.

by Graedius
I think FDR is highly over-rated... he is a perfect example of having a lot more ability to get the public behind him than actually executing sound policies. I suggest reading a more detailed account of his depression policies and how they may actually have extended/worsened it.

I think you better produce some literature on that subject before I start saying what I really think.
 
What about Johnson? Sent our troops into VietNam even though he knew we'd get our butts kicked by the V.C.
 
I'm a Woodrow Wilson man myself - and not just because of that 13th Point. ;)

Woodrow had many personal faults but he laid the legal and moral basis for the 20th century's (unattained) goals - the spread of democracy, self-determination, international cooperation through international mitigation mechanisms, and an end to wars of conquest. These were hefty goals and Woodrow himself stumbled when trying to realize them but nonetheless they are still what we are trying to become. He verbalized them first and forced the rest of the world to at least acknowledge them.

Sometimes his influence seemingly failed, but the moral imperative proved powerful - like the British and French delegates having to explain at the Paris Peace talks why the Arabs of the Lavante did not deserve "self-determination" like the peoples of Europe did - and it is still with us. I think the world is a fundamentally better place because Wilson said the things he did - and coming from the American President in 1918, the world had to listen.

Many other American Presidents also did great things, but I think they were almost all focused inward to domestic American politics in their actions, but Wilson was aware that he was stepping onto a world stage and he said things that the world needed to hear. Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, Truman, and yes I'll even concede Reagan were also great as leaders but I think Wilson's legacy spread farther. Other less-well known American presidents also did noteworthy things, like Grover Cleveland's refusal to get involved with the Spanish suppression of the Cuban revolt or to annex Hawaii, or Jimmy Carter's condemnation of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and breaking off of detente - but still Wilson had a worldwide impact few can equal.
 
Originally posted by BlueMonday
I think you better produce some literature on that subject before I start saying what I really think.
Wasn't trying to spark a debate, just pointing out that FDR wasn't as great as I've heard him made out to be.
I really wouldn't know where to point you for some critical literature of him that wasn't a few hundread pages thick. Personally I don't like him because I think he is the closest this country has ever come to a dictator, there are several dubious things he did in office an didn't get away with (like the # of Supreme court justices), he overpushed socializing the American economy even after it wasn't having the planned effects, and he was a bigger philanderer than Bill Clinton.

Other than that, the guy was a top notch president. :goodjob:
 
Originally posted by rmsharpe
Clinton is about as loved as Saddam Hussein or Ayatollah Khomeini.

Only by right-wingers. :D

If he'd had a chance at a third term, he would have wiped the floor with Bush.

Gore nearly did just that, fs. Bush didn't win by a hugely convincing amount, let us remember.

Now add Clinton, who in spite of what you say, was hugely popular with voters.

Result?

Bush junior becomes Bob Dole number 2.


I can't really find any way to justify his inclusion here, though. Perhaps it's an American thing.

P.S, as a non-American I would go for Wilson or Lincoln, with FDR second.
 
Originally posted by skywalker
Curt, you're an idiot. NO ONE could be worse than Carter. Period. Discussion over.

Slywalker,
You are a plebian oaf!

I never even mentioned Carter.
You would be advised to read the posts before you attack a poster with your simpleton's words.

I was talking aout FDR, I never even mentioned whatever you
are raving about.

Kindly stick your head in a bucket of cold water.

:mad:
 
Originally posted by Genuis
I think most of those presidents on your list were great, except for Bush. He was greedy. He killed thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians just to get oil.

I disliked Bush (both actually), but I wouldnt make up rediculous things like that to say about him.

If I remember correctly, Iraq started the war by invading Kuwait and menacing Saudi Arabia. Saddam was given 6 months to reconsider his position, at the end of which he flipped the bird to the UN and the world.

Oil supply was, ofcourse, important and why we had to stabilize the region, but not one drop of Iraqi oil fuels any American cars.

And Iraqi soldiers that previously raped, robbed and murdered everyone they could get their hands on would hardly be "innocent" by my deffinition.

Bush was a second rate domestic leader, but top notch when it came to foreign affairs.
 
Sorry, Curt, I didn't notice that the part of your post that talked about Carter was a quote. Forgiven? No? :cry:
 
Originally posted by Greadius
I suggest reading a more detailed account of his depression policies and how they may actually have extended/worsened it.

I have, and I cant understand where you are coming from.

Hoover is very guilty of doing exactly what you say, not FDR.

In fact, his rise to power and subsequent popularity came from the poor performance of Hoover in dealing with the depression, and his vow (and successfull efforts) to turn things around.

FDR didnt end the depression, WWII did. But his attempts to put people back to work when 25% of the country was unemployed were huge at the time. Ofcourse he was popular with a nation of people wondering where the next loaf of bread was going to come from.

His inspiration was also critical. Americans started to believe in themselves again. I think that may have been his greatest contribution to recovery.
 
Back
Top Bottom