Group Project: Let's Rank The Presidents and Summarize Their Presidencies

[PierzStyx]

The first use of force was by the tax collector, not by the people who refused to pay the tax. It's very strange how the same ideas used to justify the Revolutionary War against Britain are suddenly forbidden when applied to the US government. Even the founders themselves turned from the founding principles, once they were the ones in power.

Do you not believe in concepts like nullification, secession, self determination, and voluntary association?

A quote from 1848. Obviously he changed his mind a few years later.

You misunderstand if you think the Founding Fathers revolted just because they didn't want to pay their taxes. Remember the whole "No Taxation without Representation!" thing? The problem there isn't taxation, it was the whole "no representation" thing. Americans had no voice for themselves in the British government and could not govern themselves. Finally the abuses got so great and so often, and the oppression so severe, without them having a say in their own governance (even their colonial governors were crown appointed in most cases, not locally chosen leaders) that revolution became justified. But if they had had legal recourse, and representation in Parliament it might have been a different story.

The Whiskey Rebellion was not on the same grounds. They had legal representation and recourse that could effect laws governing them. (In fact after the rebellion the whiskey tax issue is what helped form Jefferson's Democratic-Republican Party, which promised to end it)The formers of the Whiskey Rebellion did not use up every justifiable legal means or any really. They did not appeal to local, state, or federal representatives or try any political action to get the tax withdrawn. They resorted to mob violence. Revolution is a last resort when all peaceful means have been exhausted. The Whiskey Rebellion did not do this. Therefore it was an unjust revolt.

And to drop a little history on you, the tax collectors were not the first to use force on anyone. They came around to collect an unpopular tax and the people who formed the Whiskey rebellion responded not just by refusing to pay but by assaulting them and driving them away. Then a US marshal arrived to serve legal writs telling them to pay their taxes or face legal action and the rebels gathered into a group of 500 men and assaulted the marshal and the home of the local tax inspector. it wasn't until this point that the federal government got involved. Washington's first step was to send peace commissioners to help settle the issue, and only when the rebels refused to do anything but rebel violently were militia troops called in. The Whiskey Rebellion formed a mob that threatened the lives and peace of the people of the state. The state asked the federal government for help. It responded and ended the rebellion peacefully ultimately. But it was the mob that initiated force.

As to Lincoln, you're laboring under a lack of understanding. Lincoln believed that revolution was only a right when you were rebelling for a just cause against an unjust government, an idea very inline with the Founding Fathers. His argument concerning the South was that it was not doing this at all. The South was rebelling for a wicked and immoral cause, to support and extend slavery, against a government that had bent over backwards to accommodate it. And that is pretty true. Because the cause of the South was to further slavery and not promulgate liberty, its revolution was unjust. All sound logic and morality I think. The irony of course is that he was a hypocrite because as he was teaching this he was simultaneously raping the Constitution.

[PierzStyx]

I might be remembering wrong, but I thought JFK was trying to get us out of Vietnam?

Check out page 3 of this thread. They talk about JFK and Vietnam there.

[invisible]

You might want to check out Recarving Rushmore by Ivan Eland. He ranks the presidents based on their ability to maintain peace, prosperity, and liberty. I read it several years ago when I was first discovering Ron Paul and it's a good way to get some real information on the unsung hero presidents.



Edit - I found a video of the Author talking about his book and historical bias at the Independent Institute if you're interested.

Excellent post, this is exactly what I was going to mention. For any of you interested in this topic, this book is excellent, and an absolute must-read! I cannot recommend this book highly enough! The video of the author's presentation is from Jan or Feb 2009, in DC. I attended this event, and Ron Paul also spoke. Ron gave an interesting talk about how obomba had an excellent opportunity to make history and accomplish great things for our country, but that he was going to blow it by breaking every one of his campaign promises. He further stated that this would result in a huge amount of discontent among young first time voters, and that this voting bloc would be up for grabs in the next election. I did buy a copy of the book, and the author signed it. Ron hung out and mingled for a while, everyone there kept asking him if he was going to run again, and all but begged him to do so. His answer at the time was that he hadn't yet made up his mind, and that it would depend on how much support he had. This was really a wonderful event to attend, probably one of the more interesting Ron Paul appearances I've been to. I'm not sure if video of Ron speaking is available online, but I do know that the II was selling a DVD of this presentation (I shot my own video of this event). I do not know if the DVD or book are still being sold. For those of you who do not have the book, the author's conclusion was Tyler (IIRC) was the President that did the most to advance / maintain peace, prosperity, and liberty.

[libertyjam]

JFK also planned Vietnam, he just got shot before he could carry it out.

Just where does all this fairy tale crap on JFK come from?

[libertyjam]

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/198912--.htm



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role_of...2.80.931963.29

Man if that is what Chomsky wrote you seriously have to stop reading him. No wonder he has been called a Stalinist, rewriting history like that.

[fisharmor]

Compared with the Presidents we've had this century Lincoln looks like Ron Paul, or at least Ronald Reagan.

Harry Truman decided to drop nuclear bombs on some Japanese citizens during a declared war which resulted in somewhere around 150,000 dead.
Lincoln started an aggressive, illegal, unnecessary, undeclared war against fellow Americans, which resulted in over 600,000 dead.
Sure, take your pick.


I think the bottom three is going to have to be FDR, Wilson, and Lincoln in some order. It's hard to figure out which is worst.
And I'm actually serious: first should be William Henry Harrison.

[Sam I am]

Harry Truman decided to drop nuclear bombs on some Japanese citizens during a declared war which resulted in somewhere around 150,000 dead.
Lincoln started an aggressive, illegal, unnecessary, undeclared war against fellow Americans, which resulted in over 600,000 dead.
Sure, take your pick.


I think the bottom three is going to have to be FDR, Wilson, and Lincoln in some order. It's hard to figure out which is worst.
And I'm actually serious: first should be William Henry Harrison.

Nuclear weapons were responsible for less than 1% of the deaths in world war 2

[Massachusetts]

I think when you talk about the US presidents you need to rank them on different scales: domestic policy and foreign policy. I would say it is rare that any President if any have ever completely nailed it on both domestic and foreign policy.

[John F Kennedy III]

Just where does all this fairy tale crap on JFK come from?

Good question.

[John F Kennedy III]

Ok why are people SERIOUS that the best is William Henry Harrison? He talked in the rain at his inauguration for two hours and got pneumonia and died from it a month later. What's so good about that?

[The Gold Standard]

Ok why are people SERIOUS that the best is William Henry Harrison? He talked in the rain at his inauguration for two hours and got pneumonia and died from it a month later. What's so good about that?

He did the least amount of damage of any U.S. president.

[John F Kennedy III]

He did the least amount of damage of any U.S. president.

Good answer. I was going to reply with the guy who served as President for a day, but upon further research he didn't. Though some people still give him credit for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_R...for_One_Day.22

[kill the banks]

Just where does all this fairy tale crap on JFK come from?

I should just shut up but geez people please read more ...

[Lishy]

Just where does all this fairy tale crap on JFK come from?

I dunno. But I think JFK is glorified simply because of the assassination thing.

Why did he do nothing about MKUltra!? Did he not know about it, or what? What about Bay of Pigs!?

[John F Kennedy III]

I dunno. But I think JFK is glorified simply because of the assassination thing.

Why did he do nothing about MKUltra!? Did he not know about it, or what? What about Bay of Pigs!?

I admittedly need to research the presidents more, including JFK. He did do bad things, but I also believe he genuinely cared about the American people. He is hands down the best president post 1930 (he is the only one that wasn't a puppet)

[John F Kennedy III]

From an older thread discussing presidents:

Accomplishments of president James Madison, our greatest president:

1) the first president to establish limited exectuve and war powers. Madison set many precedents regarding what a president can do in a time of war:

a) no military draft needed to win
b) no central bank needed
3) no income tax needed
4) no significant standing army needed
5) no violations of civil liberties
6) no censorship of the press
7) no round up of ethnic minorities or enemies
8) declaration of war debated by public and duly voted upon by congress
9) declaration of war states specifically the causes for war and the goals for victory
10) no special executive wat powers claimed by president

2) War of 1812 the greatest victory in US history:

a) very low casualties, entire war had fewer deaths than single civil war battles or single battles in Napoleoin wars
b) lasting peace established with England
c) Victories at New Orleans, Baltimore, Plattsburgh/Lake Champlain, Horsehoe Bend, Chippewa, Lake Erie, the Thames, Tippacanoe, York, and the 2nd barbary War are among the greatest in US history
d) War of 1812 & 2nd barbary war established free trade on the Great Lakes, Mississippi Rvier, Gulf of Mexico, Carribean Sea, Mediterrenean Sea, and Atlantic ocean.
e) Madison retired as the most popular 2nd term president in all US history per many authorities including John Adams
f) Madison started the Era of Good Feelings
g) victories of the USS Constitution, aka Old Ioronsides, among the most accliamed in all US history.
h) Patriotic Uncle Sam icon created during Madison's term
i) famous people like Sam Houston and Davy Crockett got theoir careers started under Madison
j) War of 1812 veterans dominated congress and the presidency for almost 50 years.

3) Madison delivered 7 vetoes, compared to 0 by Jefferson and Adams and only 2 (minor ones) by Washington.

a) the principle of sepeartion of church and states was clearly established by James Madison, via vetoes.

4) Madison set limits on the powers of a central bank:

a) In January 1815, despite being in the middle for a war, Madison veotes a bill that would have expanded the powers of the central bank (Madison also let the 1st bank die in 1811, even though he knew war was coming).
b) In 1816, Madison signed a bank bill that had the exact sames powers as the bank already deemed Constitutional by George Washington.
c) Everybody knew exactly waht Madison was doing.
d) hence the Federal Reserve Act is not only blantantly unconstitutional, but bad policy as well, per other Madison principles (banks only needed to pay of debts from NECESSARY defensive wars).

5) Madison hand-picked his successor, one of the few to do so:

a) James Monroe went on to become one of our greatest presidents.

6) Madison was never involved in any scandals.

[cityoflight]

Martin Van Buren was an a-hole who allowed for the legal extermination (I'm not even exaggerating. Look up "Missouri Extermination Order) of a people based on their religion to take place, for them to be driven from their homes, and for their property and civil rights to be taken away. Disgusting.

And Carter? He CREATED the Department of Education. That is why he gets a bad rap from conservatives. he created one of the single most intrusive government departments that is responsible for molding the minds of your children according to the Fedgov's dictates. The man deserves every bad word said about him.

Van Buren didn't issue that order; it was from the governor of Missouri, and came during a series of armed skirmishes between the Mormons and local militia in which both sides sustained casualties. The governor acted upon exaggerated rumors that a Mormon "invasion" was in the works. The order is indefensible, but I don't think it's exactly fair to saddle Van Buren with it. He could probably have been more proactive in containing the situation, but if he had ordered a massive federal response we'd probably be complaining about that too. I don't see how something he wasn't even responsible for wipes out everything on the positive side of his ledger.

And with Carter, the DOE is certainly a disaster... not disagreeing with you there. I'm not saying Carter was great or even good, just that he's not the Antichrist conservatives make him out to be. For many people Carter seems to be the automatic comparison for a historically bad president, but based on the facts there were many who were far, far worse. For all his mistakes, again: he deregulated more than Reagan, showed some restraint with defense spending, and took a big step in the right direction with monetary policy. There are a lot of Republican presidents who don't have that kind of resume.

[John F Kennedy III]

Updated OP with something resembling a ranking. I'm looking for debate on that and more info on the presidents so I can do a summary for each, especially the presidents who haven't been mentioned yet.

[MaxPower]

Here is the latest iteration of my presidential ratings list (first compiled a couple years ago, tweaked a few times since):

1. Grover Cleveland
2. Thomas Jefferson
3. James Monroe
4. George Washington
5. Warren G. Harding
6. Calvin Coolidge
7. James A. Garfield
8. Ulysses S. Grant
9. James Madison
10. John Tyler
11. Benjamin Harrison
12. Rutherford B. Hayes
13. John Q. Adams
14. Martin Van Buren
15. Zachary Taylor
16. Chester A. Arthur
17. John Adams
18. William H. Taft
19. Andrew Jackson
20. William Henry Harrison
21. Jimmy Carter
22. Gerald Ford
23. Ronald Reagan
24. Herbert Hoover
25. John F. Kennedy
26. Dwight Eisenhower
27. Andrew Johnson
28. Franklin Pierce
29. Millard Fillmore
30. James Buchanan
31. William McKinley
32. Abraham Lincoln
33. Theodore Roosevelt
34. George H.W. Bush
35. James K. Polk
36. Bill Clinton
37. Richard Nixon
38. Lyndon B. Johnson
39. George W. Bush
40. Harry Truman
41. Woodrow Wilson
42. Franklin Roosevelt

Obama will be included when his term is finished, at which time he is likely to appear near the bottom.

[MaxPower]

Just curious, when was the last time we had a legitimately good president? Someone who was small government, low regulations, anti-war president?

I know every president in my life has been crap 31 years, but everything else I know about presidents before that came from my history books. Anyone who has ever read a history book knows that ALL U.S. presidents are considered great presidents. For example, FDR is considered a great president for getting us through the great depression. But anyone with a brain knows that if FDR was actually great he wouldn't have let the depression become great and there actually would have been a recovery.

Calvin Coolidge was generally a good president, aside from participating in the enforcement of brutal and draconian Prohibition policies. I consider his immediate predecessor, Harding, a little better, on the grounds that Harding (though he promised on the campaign trail to enforce it), in addition to being (like Coolidge) a largely libertarian president with a peaceful foreign policy and financially-conservative domestic agenda, was lax toward Prohibition.

[tttppp]

Calvin Coolidge was generally a good president, aside from participating in the enforcement of brutal and draconian Prohibition policies. I consider his immediate predecessor, Harding, a little better, on the grounds that Harding (though he promised on the campaign trail to enforce it), in addition to being (like Coolidge) a largely libertarian president with a peaceful foreign policy and financially-conservative domestic agenda, was lax toward Prohibition.

What years was he president?

[enoch150]

You misunderstand if you think the Founding Fathers revolted just because they didn't want to pay their taxes. Remember the whole "No Taxation without Representation!" thing? The problem there isn't taxation, it was the whole "no representation" thing. Americans had no voice for themselves in the British government and could not govern themselves. Finally the abuses got so great and so often, and the oppression so severe, without them having a say in their own governance (even their colonial governors were crown appointed in most cases, not locally chosen leaders) that revolution became justified. But if they had had legal recourse, and representation in Parliament it might have been a different story.

The Whiskey Rebellion was not on the same grounds. They had legal representation and recourse that could effect laws governing them. (In fact after the rebellion the whiskey tax issue is what helped form Jefferson's Democratic-Republican Party, which promised to end it)The formers of the Whiskey Rebellion did not use up every justifiable legal means or any really. They did not appeal to local, state, or federal representatives or try any political action to get the tax withdrawn. They resorted to mob violence. Revolution is a last resort when all peaceful means have been exhausted. The Whiskey Rebellion did not do this. Therefore it was an unjust revolt.

And to drop a little history on you, the tax collectors were not the first to use force on anyone. They came around to collect an unpopular tax and the people who formed the Whiskey rebellion responded not just by refusing to pay but by assaulting them and driving them away. Then a US marshal arrived to serve legal writs telling them to pay their taxes or face legal action and the rebels gathered into a group of 500 men and assaulted the marshal and the home of the local tax inspector. it wasn't until this point that the federal government got involved. Washington's first step was to send peace commissioners to help settle the issue, and only when the rebels refused to do anything but rebel violently were militia troops called in. The Whiskey Rebellion formed a mob that threatened the lives and peace of the people of the state. The state asked the federal government for help. It responded and ended the rebellion peacefully ultimately. But it was the mob that initiated force.

As to Lincoln, you're laboring under a lack of understanding. Lincoln believed that revolution was only a right when you were rebelling for a just cause against an unjust government, an idea very inline with the Founding Fathers. His argument concerning the South was that it was not doing this at all. The South was rebelling for a wicked and immoral cause, to support and extend slavery, against a government that had bent over backwards to accommodate it. And that is pretty true. Because the cause of the South was to further slavery and not promulgate liberty, its revolution was unjust. All sound logic and morality I think. The irony of course is that he was a hypocrite because as he was teaching this he was simultaneously raping the Constitution.

No taxation without representation made for a good rallying cry, but it wasn't the primary cause of the revolution. Of the thirty or so points listed in the Declaration of Independence, taxes are only mentioned once "For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent"

Taxation even with representation amounts to nothing more than mob rule. Those in revolt weren't the mob. The mob consisted of those imposing the tax. The tax collector initiated violence because he had the backing of the government: pay up or there will be 15,000 militia here to force you to pay and/or imprison you. Washington's peace commissioner's were a joke: they had no intention of not enforcing the tax, therefore, they were not there to resolve anything. Their purpose was to stall and intimidate. Those who initiated the Whiskey Rebellion should be applauded.

I've read the surrounding text in the Lincoln speech. You're just making stuff up. He makes no mention of revolution only being for just cause against unjust government. He states very clearly that any time a majority of some area wants to be independent, they may do so, and old laws are void.

...I propose to state my understanding of the true rule for ascertaining the boundary between Texas and Mexico. It is, that wherever Texas was exercising jurisdiction, was hers; and wherever Mexico was exercising jurisdiction, was hers; and that whatever separated the actual exercise of jurisdiction of the one, from that of the other, was the true boundary between them. If, as is probably true, Texas was exercising jurisdiction along the western bank of the Nueces, and Mexico was exercising it along the eastern bank of the Rio Grande, then neither river was the boundary; but the uninhabited country between the two, was. The extent of our teritory in that region depended, not on any treaty-fixed boundary (for no treaty had attempted it) but on revolution Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable,-- most sacred right--a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much of the teritory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled with, or near about them, who may oppose their movement. Such minority, was precisely the case, of the tories of our own revolution. It is a quality of revolutions not to go by old lines, or old laws; but to break up both, and make new ones. As to the country now in question, we bought it of France in 18O3, and sold it to Spain in 1819, according to the President's statements...

[PreDeadMan]

Harrison is at number one.... and... that's it for the best presidents

[cstarace]

Woodrow Wilson ftw

[enoch150]

Man if that is what Chomsky wrote you seriously have to stop reading him. No wonder he has been called a Stalinist, rewriting history like that.

With regard to Kennedy, Chomsky mentions the Strategic Hamlet Program, begun in 1961. This consisted of rounding up rural villagers by the South Vietnamese government and placing them in camps surrounded by barbed wire, which the villagers were forced to construct themselves. The South Vietnamese government burned the homes of villagers to prevent their return, and executed those who refused to comply. The plan was designed by the US and all of the materials for constructing the camps were supplied by the US.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Hamlet_Program

That same year the US Air Force began dropping highly toxic chemical defoliants and herbicides on the South Vietnamese countryside. Agent Orange was used later, but during the Kennedy Administration they used similar substances dubbed Agent Pink, Agent Green, Agent Purple, and Agent Blue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ranch_Hand

[TroySmith]

True but Coolidge and Harding both also expanded the money supply excessively which led to the Great Depression. They have to lose a few points for that. Coolidge in particular can't be blamed for the length and severity of the Depression but he can be partially faulted for creating the conditions that allowed it to begin.

Not really. Coolidge openly acknowledged he didn't agree with the Feds easy money, but said he had no Constitutional authority to stop it. It was Congress who was responsible.

[John F Kennedy III]

Here is the latest iteration of my presidential ratings list (first compiled a couple years ago, tweaked a few times since):

1. Grover Cleveland
2. Thomas Jefferson
3. James Monroe
4. George Washington
5. Warren G. Harding
6. Calvin Coolidge
7. James A. Garfield
8. Ulysses S. Grant
9. James Madison
10. John Tyler
11. Benjamin Harrison
12. Rutherford B. Hayes
13. John Q. Adams
14. Martin Van Buren
15. Zachary Taylor
16. Chester A. Arthur
17. John Adams
18. William H. Taft
19. Andrew Jackson
20. William Henry Harrison
21. Jimmy Carter
22. Gerald Ford
23. Ronald Reagan
24. Herbert Hoover
25. John F. Kennedy
26. Dwight Eisenhower
27. Andrew Johnson
28. Franklin Pierce
29. Millard Fillmore
30. James Buchanan
31. William McKinley
32. Abraham Lincoln
33. Theodore Roosevelt
34. George H.W. Bush
35. James K. Polk
36. Bill Clinton
37. Richard Nixon
38. Lyndon B. Johnson
39. George W. Bush
40. Harry Truman
41. Woodrow Wilson
42. Franklin Roosevelt

Obama will be included when his term is finished, at which time he is likely to appear near the bottom.

Thank you I think I'm going to paste this in the OP. Can you provide any info on the presidents?

[MaxPower]

Thank you I think I'm going to paste this in the OP. Can you provide any info on the presidents?

Sure-- here are some comments:

1. Grover Cleveland-- the best example of genuine fealty to the presidential oath of office, manifested through strict construction and enforcement of the US Constitution's limits on the national government, in all of US history, as illustrated by his issuance of nearly 600 vetoes-- more than all the presidents before him combined. Equally important was his peaceful, non-interventionist foreign policy, best exemplified in his passionate opposition to the US take-over of Hawaii (which he managed, at the least, to delay for a time). He was an outspoken opponent of "paternalism" in government, fought for hard currency in the form of a Gold Standard, fought to decrease taxes and spending (against a Republican congress very eager to run up debt on the perceived credit card that was the American public), and could be relied on to stick to his guns regardless of perceived political advantage. He was the closest thing to a President Paul we've ever had. A story that can bring a tear to the eye: his last words were "I have tried so hard to do right."
2. Thomas Jefferson-- an utter genius, and one of the very greatest proto-libertarian thinkers and leaders. During his presidency, he oversaw the abolition of all internal taxes, the scaling back of the military and federal workforce, the repeal of the Alien and Sedition Acts, the banning of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, and the reduction of the national debt by a third-- the government was operating on nothing but tariffs, land sales and postage stamps, and still running a surplus. On the downside, he did (by his own admission) ultimately break with strict constructionism in his actions relating to the Louisiana Purchase, and the Embargo Act of 1807 which he pushed as a means of pressuring Europe into meeting American demands was a disaster.
3. James Monroe-- cut taxes and spending, substantially reduced the national debt, took a primarily non-interventionist stance on foreign affairs. He did unleash a certain trigger-happy General Jackson on the Indians (grimly foreshadowing certain future developments) in one unfortunate incident.
4. George Washington-- not really a libertarian, unfortunately (he signed on to Hamilton's national bank and whiskey tax bills), but still a genuine believer in the rule of law and not of men, who had every opportunity to be a king or an emperor, but refused, set a powerful precedent against such usurpation, and in so doing gave the United States the opportunity to endure as the freest nation on Earth for many decades. He was also admirably non-interventionist in foreign affairs, and codified it in his farewell address, which has served as a rallying point against imperialism in the centuries since.
5. Warren G. Harding-- his brief stint in the presidency was a wonderful remedy to Woodrow Wilson's eight years. He overturned the oppressive Sedition Act of 1917, freed Wilson's political prisoners, finalized peace in the aftermath of World War I, didn't intervene in the economy when the stock market crashed, but instead cut taxes and spending (leading to a quick recovery), balanced the budget, and reduced the national debt. On the downside, he at least paid lip service to supporting alcohol prohibition (though he did very little to enforce it once he took office and was an alcoholic himself), raised tariffs to their highest level in US history up to that stage, and made some poor choices in cabinet members, leading to corruption (graft, patronage and whatnot) scandals within his administration.
6. Calvin Coolidge-- essentially continued Harding's agenda; he cut taxes and spending, kept the federal government out of the economy for the most part, stayed out of other countries' internal affairs, and cut the national debt. On the other hand, Coolidge was a more vigorous enforcer of Prohibition, to the point of assenting to some policies that were outright draconian, such as a scheme by the government to poison ingredients of alcoholic beverages in order to scare people out of drinking them.
7. James A. Garfield
8. Ulysses S. Grant-- I know some here hold a heavy grudge against Grant for his role in the Civil War, but the fact is, his administration cut taxes and spending, reduced the debt, reinstated hard currency, and generally had a respectably non-interventionist agenda (both domestically and abroad) throughout his presidency.
9. James Madison- he generally conducted himself in a manner befitting a strict constructionist, and was notable as about the only president ever to conduct a major war without engaging in any massive civil-liberties violations, massacring civilians, or instigating any major permanent expansions of the federal government. On the other hand, he oversaw tax increases and signed the Second Bank of the United States into law.
10. John Tyler-- did a good job antagonizing and obstructing the congress during his very brief presidency.
11. Benjamin Harrison
12. Rutherford B. Hayes
13. John Q. Adams-- pushed increased taxation and government intervention into the economy, but did at least tend toward foreign non-interventionism and substantially reduce the national debt.
14. Martin Van Buren
15. Zachary Taylor
16. Chester A. Arthur
17. John Adams
18. William H. Taft
19. Andrew Jackson-- I know Jackson is very popular with some libertarians for killing the second national bank and briefly extinguishing the national debt, and these are great accomplishments indeed, but his illegal and egregious atrocities toward the Indians and distinctly authoritarian use of presidential power (as when he bullied the states during the Nullification Crisis and ignored a Supreme Court ruling that he had to respect previous treaties with the Indians rather than evict them) knock him way down in my book.
20. William Henry Harrison-- it is, of course, a popular meme around these parts that Harrison was the best president for dying in 30 days, but if we're being serious, I don't think this holds water. When the president dies, someone else replaces him; theoretically, even if every president died in 30 days, the government could still grow. Harrison wanted to expand the federal government, although he admittedly barely got to actually do anything toward that end.
21. Jimmy Carter-- gets an excessively bad rap in some quarters these days; he actually oversaw moderately significant deregulation of the economy, and was one of the less authoritarian and warlike presidents of the last few decades.
22. Gerald Ford
23. Ronald Reagan-- a divisive figure in and out of libertarian circles, but I think this is largely because of his compelling and distinctive rhetoric and persona; his policies were generally fairly unremarkable. He did deregulate domestically, and was much less of a warmonger than any of the presidents who have followed in his wake (though still too much of one), but also allowed enormous increases in net spending and debt, expanded the drug war, and had the CIA meddling in foreign affairs in ways that would come back to bite us horribly, among other things.
24. Herbert Hoover-- not a good president, but the burden of blame for the Great Depression is shifted far too heavily onto him and away from his successor, who heavily ramped-up Hoover's bad government-expansionist policies with a fervor and audacious thirst for power which Hoover himself would never have dreamed of.
25. John F. Kennedy
26. Dwight Eisenhower
27. Andrew Johnson
28. Franklin Pierce
29. Millard Fillmore
30. James Buchanan
31. William McKinley
32. Abraham Lincoln-- his atrocities and usurpations are well-discussed in these parts, but I submit that his role in ending slavery is a major redeeming feature which puts him above the guys to follow.
33. Theodore Roosevelt
34. George H.W. Bush
35. James K. Polk-- the father of unconstitutional imperialistic presidential warmaking.
36. Bill Clinton
37. Richard Nixon
38. Lyndon B. Johnson
39. George W. Bush
40. Harry Truman-- responsible for the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atrocities and illegal presidential war in Korea, put the first US troops in Vietnam, tried to illegally seize and nationalize the steel industry.
41. Woodrow Wilson-- a self-described socialist and eugenicist; a radical interventionist (in both domestic and foreign spheres), white supremacist (note that he publicly assented to the accuracy of the film "the Birth of a Nation," which depicted the Ku Klux Klan as a band of gallant knights) authoritarian who lied to the public about his intention to get the US into World War I (he actually campaigned on the slogan "he kept us out of war" while, as is well-documented, fully intending to get the US into the war after he was elected), resegregated integrated federal departments, jailed his political opponents under the Sedition Act of 1917, and was a driving force behind the creation of the Federal Reserve and the institution of the federal income tax.
42. Franklin Roosevelt-- an autocratic despot whose duplicitousness, brutality, and disregard for the rule of law were unmatched. He embarked on the biggest agenda of government regimentation of the economy in all of US history (which severely prolonged the Great Depression), underhandedly bullied the Supreme Court into accepting his illegal New Deal programs, initiated the worst racial persecution by a US president since the Trail of Tears in the form of Japanese internment, became the first and only president to ignore Washington's two-term precedent, lied through his teeth to the American public about his intention to get the US into World War II, undertook a campaign of vicious firebombing of civilian populations during World War II... the list goes on. All told, he did more to break down the Constitution's barriers against federal power, install a permanent big-government apparatus in the United States, set a standard of amoral Machiavellian policy-making that treats human beings like disposable objects of convenience, and put the country on an irreversible course toward financial insolvency than any other individual ever has.

[John F Kennedy III]

Thank you Max I will definitely use this in the OP.

[dillo]

Don't forget killing thousands of natives, denying them their property rights by seizing private Indian land for state and federal purposes, their civil rights, and ejecting them form the country. Also ignoring the rule of law by refusing the acknowledge the ruling and authority of the Supreme Court when it said his acts were unjust. Then there is threatening to hang every citizen of South Carolina when the state threatened to nullify his tariffs. He was not a good President, or even a good man as far as I am concerned.

how about a no