My list;

1. Ronald Reagan
2. Abraham Lincoln
3. Franklin D Roosevelt
4. Lyndon B Johnson
5. Bill Clinton

1. Barack Obama
2. Bill Clinton
3. Franklin D. Roosevelt
4. Lyndon B. Johnson
5. George H.W. Bush

The greatest President that nobody remembers is Grover Cleveland.

The greatest President that nobody remembers is Grover Cleveland.

What made him great?

What made him great?


He had the most scandal free administration ever for a President up to that point, and helped the confidence of the American people after the scandalous Grant years.

Actually, Grant also is a President that seems a lot better looking back at it now. Yes he had an extremely corrupt administration, but he oversaw passage of the 15th Amendment which guaranteed blacks the right to vote, and actually enforced it during his presidency. He also used his executive power to break up the Ku Klux Klan, and otherwise protect the rights of southern blacks. Honestly, it wasn't truly until after he left office that Jim Crow began to pick up steam.

Of those I was around to see: Clinton and Obama.
Of those who served before I was born: Washington, Lincoln, and FDR.

That makes five (in no particular order).

Rank of U.S. Presidents in my lifetime

From worst to least:

1. Donald J. Trump
2. George W. Bush
3. William J. Clinton
4. Barack H. Obama

1. Abraham Lincoln - Really embodies everything that the American President should be.

2. Franklin D. Roosevelt - Saved the United States from total annihilation by giving us hope through the Great Depression and successfully fighting World War II.

3. George Washington - Had the firmest vision of how American democracy should function in that despite issuing assertive leadership, he allowed his administration to end after two terms and vested important power in members of cabinet.

4. Theodore Roosevelt - Another President brilliant for going beyond simple party politics and instead balancing his goals for the sake of America as a whole. He supported American capitalism, yet at the same time was instrumental in undoing the atrocious wealth gap and intolerable work conditions that had pervaded during the Gilded Age. He proved that you could be a brilliant reformer while still being unmistakably American, too.

5. Lyndon B. Johnson - He gets heavily derided for his clumsy handling of Vietnam, but his accomplishments on the domestic front were so great that his overall legacy is far more positive than the vast majority of other modern Presidents. He was an ambitious visionary, and he had exactly the tact and personality to push through reforms needed to give more of a fair chance to everyday Americans.

On a personal level, I also think George H. W. Bush was a great and seriously underrated President. He seemed to really transcend Party politics and back whatever made the most sense to his country, not to mention he was especially deft in foreign policy. Reagan may have been charismatic, but Bush '41 was more level-headed and effective, in my opinion.

Worst would be Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan, and Donald Trump. The only reason Trump isn't a clear loser over both is because his administration has yet to cause the same level of damage to American history as Johnson or Buchanan. Andrew Johnson pretty much single-handedly set African American civil rights back several decades by smothering the social foundations of Reconstruction, while James Buchanan's rudderless leadership allowed the Civil War to spiral into a crisis of such great magnitude that it would cost the lives of hundreds of thousands. Trump, so far, has just been a corrupt mess offering no positive leadership, but the United States isn't irreparably scarred the same way, at least not yet.

1. Abraham Lincoln - Really embodies everything that the American President should be.

2. Franklin D. Roosevelt - Saved the United States from total annihilation by giving us hope through the Great Depression and successfully fighting World War II.

3. George Washington - Had the firmest vision of how American democracy should function in that despite issuing assertive leadership, he allowed his administration to end after two terms and vested important power in members of cabinet.

4. Theodore Roosevelt - Another President brilliant for going beyond simple party politics and instead balancing his goals for the sake of America as a whole. He supported American capitalism, yet at the same time was instrumental in undoing the atrocious wealth gap and intolerable work conditions that had pervaded during the Gilded Age. He proved that you could be a brilliant reformer while still being unmistakably American, too.

5. Lyndon B. Johnson - He gets heavily derided for his clumsy handling of Vietnam, but his accomplishments on the domestic front were so great that his overall legacy is far more positive than the vast majority of other modern Presidents. He was an ambitious visionary, and he had exactly the tact and personality to push through reforms needed to give more of a fair chance to everyday Americans.
Nice list.


On a personal level, I also think George H. W. Bush was a great and seriously underrated President. He seemed to really transcend Party politics and back whatever made the most sense to his country, not to mention he was especially deft in foreign policy. Reagan may have been charismatic, but Bush '41 was more level-headed and effective, in my opinion.
I wholeheartedly agree with you on Bush 41. That's why he's #5 on my personal list.


Worst would be Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan, and Donald Trump. The only reason Trump isn't a clear loser over both is because his administration has yet to cause the same level of damage to American history as Johnson or Buchanan. Andrew Johnson pretty much single-handedly set African American civil rights back several decades by smothering the social foundations of Reconstruction, while James Buchanan's rudderless leadership allowed the Civil War to spiral into a crisis of such great magnitude that it would cost the lives of hundreds of thousands. Trump, so far, has just been a corrupt mess offering no positive leadership, but the United States isn't irreparably scarred the same way, at least not yet.

You summed it pretty nicely.

Worst would be Andrew Johnson, James Buchanan, and Donald Trump. The only reason Trump isn't a clear loser over both is because his administration has yet to cause the same level of damage to American history as Johnson or Buchanan. Andrew Johnson pretty much single-handedly set African American civil rights back several decades by smothering the social foundations of Reconstruction, while James Buchanan's rudderless leadership allowed the Civil War to spiral into a crisis of such great magnitude that it would cost the lives of hundreds of thousands. Trump, so far, has just been a corrupt mess offering no positive leadership, but the United States isn't irreparably scarred the same way, at least not yet.


I also think Herbert Hoover was a terrible president.

Trump, so far, has just been a corrupt mess offering no positive leadership, but the United States isn't irreparably scarred the same way, at least not yet.

Agreed.

I really like Teddy Roosevelt.

1. Abraham Lincoln - Helped reunited the Union and Passed The Emancipation of Proclamation

2. Franklin Delano Roosevelt - Helped revive the country during The Great Recession and lead the U.S to victory in WWII

3. George Washington - Was the first President of the U.S & thus set a precedent on the qualities of a President, not to mention his astounding foreign policy achievements before and during his presidency

4. Theodore Roosevelt - Facilitated the 'Big Stick' policy by spreading American Imperialism into the modern era (for better or worst) and fought the massive corruption in the U.S banking systems

5. Dwight Eisenhower - Established the Interstate Highway System, brought an end to the Korean War, pushed for racial integration in public schools, and brought a new era in peace by cutting the military budget by roughly 50%

I really like Teddy Roosevelt.


"walk softly and carry a big stick".

Has anyone else noticed how in recent history there has never been an American president that served two terms starting in a "7" year and ending in a "5" year?

Has anyone else noticed how in recent history there has never been an American president that served two terms starting in a "7" year and ending in a "5" year?

Yeah, I've noticed that.

The last U.S. President to do so was President James Monroe who served 2 terms from 1817-1825. That's 192 years ago :o.

Yeah, I've noticed that.

The last U.S. President to do so was President James Monroe who served 2 terms from 1817-1825. That's 192 years ago :o.


He's the only president to have served from this time span!  :o

He's the only president to have served from this time span!  :o

Yep :o.

Has anyone else noticed how in recent history there has never been an American president that served two terms starting in a "7" year and ending in a "5" year?

Yeah, I've noticed that.

The last U.S. President to do so was President James Monroe who served 2 terms from 1817-1825. That's 192 years ago :o.

He's the only president to have served from this time span!  :o

Yep :o.

I actually hadn't realized that until now.

I actually hadn't realized that until now.

Most people haven't...so that's normal.

Obama was actually the first President to enter office during the 9 year to serve two full terms after that since Ulysses Grant, who served from 1869-1877. Benjamin Harrison served from 1889-1893, William Howard Taft served from 1909-1913, Herbert Hoover served from 1929-1933, Harry Truman served his only full term from 1949-1953, Richard Nixon served from 1969-1974 due to resignation, and George H. W. Bush served 1989-1993.

Obama was actually the first President to enter office during the 9 year to serve two full terms after that since Ulysses Grant, who served from 1869-1877. Benjamin Harrison served from 1889-1893, William Howard Taft served from 1909-1913, Herbert Hoover served from 1929-1933, Harry Truman served his only full term from 1949-1953, Richard Nixon served from 1969-1974 due to resignation, and George H. W. Bush served 1989-1993.


You missed the point, what I was saying was, there has been no president in over 200 years that started his presidency in a year that ended in "9" and left office in a year that ended in "5". The only president that has served this time was James Monroe from 1817 to 1825.

Most people haven't...so that's normal.

I often find interesting facts like that, about presidential stints.

You missed the point, what I was saying was, there has been no president in over 200 years that started his presidency in a year that ended in "9" and left office in a year that ended in "5". The only president that has served this time was James Monroe from 1817 to 1825.

I totally get that. But here you just said "started his presidency in a year ending in '9' and left office in a year ending in '5'." That's different, since that would only be a six-year span (or a term and a half).

I totally get that. But here you just said "started his presidency in a year ending in '9' and left office in a year ending in '5'." That's different, since that would only be a six-year span (or a term and a half).


9? Oh sorry, I got that mixed up. I meant 7.

9? Oh sorry, I got that mixed up. I meant 7.

Yeah and he was talking about Presidents starting their Presidency ending in the year "9".

44 men have served as President and 48 men have served as Vice President.

9? Oh sorry, I got that mixed up. I meant 7.

No worries. :)



Yeah and he was talking about Presidents starting their Presidency ending in the year "9".

Yes, Machinehead was talking about that (the most recent of whom was Obama, who completed two full terms).

44 men have served as President and 48 men have served as Vice President.

That's right, because President #22 and #24 was the same guy: Grover Cleveland. (He was the only person to serve two stints in the White House. He was first elected in 1884, but defeated for reelection in 1888 (thus his first stint was 1885-89); then in 1892 he came back to defeat Benjamin Harrison and hence win another term (1893-97).)

That's right, because President #22 and #24 was the same guy: Grover Cleveland. (He was the only person to serve two stints in the White House. He was first elected in 1884, but defeated for reelection in 1888 (thus his first stint was 1885-89); then in 1892 he came back to defeat Benjamin Harrison and hence win another term (1893-97).)

*two SEPARATE stints.

However, yes...that is correct.

*two SEPARATE stints.

However, yes...that is correct.

yeah, two nonconsecutive ones.

Two other things I've also wondered about the presidency;

Before 1951, presidents were able to serve more than two terms, yet the only president to do so was FDR, why was this?

How come only one president has ever served two non-consecutive terms?

Two other things I've also wondered about the presidency;

Before 1951, presidents were able to serve more than two terms, yet the only president to do so was FDR, why was this?

How come only one president has ever served two non-consecutive terms?

Originally, there were no term limits on Presidents..so they could have served for however long they wanted. George Washington set the precedent that Presidents shouldn't be in office more than two 4 year terms. However, that wasn't law.

FDR felt that he was the ONLY person who could lead the country through the Great Depression and then-WWII, so he broke with the tradition and precedent set by George Washington and he ran for (and won) a 3rd and also 4th term. However, Congress didn't want that to happen again...so in 1947, Congress passed the 22nd Amendment that made it LAW that no person can serve more than two 4 year terms as President. The Amendment wasn't ratified until 1951 and so Dwight D. Eisenhower (President from 1953-1961) was the first President to be term limited and every President since him has been term limited.

1. Abraham Lincoln
2. Lyndon B. Johnson
3. Barack Obama
4. Theodore Roosevelt
5. Bill Clinton

That's really all I know. :D ;D

For Canadian prime ministers (federal and provincial) it would be

1. Pierre Trudeau
2. Lester B. Pearson
3. Jean Lesage
4. Tommy Douglas
5. Louis St. Laurent

There were a few other Presidents that attempted to run for a third term. Ulysses Grant tried to run for a third term during the 1880 Republican National Convention but lost the nomination. There was also some talk of Grover Cleveland running for what would've been his third term during the 1896 election, but he dropped out of the race.

Also, even though the 22nd amendment was passed during Harry Truman's second term, it did not affect him due to the fact that it passed during his administration. Truman was going to run for a third term during the 1952 election, but dropped out because of his unpopularity.

Also, even though the 22nd amendment was passed during Harry Truman's second term, it did not affect him due to the fact that it passed during his administration. Truman was going to run for a third term during the 1952 election, but dropped out because of his unpopularity.

Yeah, that's why I said that Eisenhower was the first term limited Prez ;).

Teddy Roosevelt is a complicated case.

If you judge him solely by his accomplishments...he was a good to great President.

However, if you judge him based of his beliefs and morality...then yeah...he's not great in that department. He thought that Africans Americans should stay in their place and he believed in the superiority of "the Anglo-Saxon race". He also urged people to embrace “the clear instinct for race selfishness.” He advocated imperialism by saying, “It is wholly impossible to avoid conflicts with the weaker races.”

I mean...we named teddy bears after this guy :-\\.

Originally, there were no term limits on Presidents..so they could have served for however long they wanted. George Washington set the precedent that Presidents shouldn't be in office more than two 4 year terms. However, that wasn't law.

FDR felt that he was the ONLY person who could lead the country through the Great Depression and then-WWII, so he broke with the tradition and precedent set by George Washington and he ran for (and won) a 3rd and also 4th term. However, Congress didn't want that to happen again...so in 1947, Congress passed the 22nd Amendment that made it LAW that no person can serve more than two 4 year terms as President. The Amendment wasn't ratified until 1951 and so Dwight D. Eisenhower (President from 1953-1961) was the first President to be term limited and every President since him has been term limited.


Was there any reason Washington felt that presidents shouldn't be in office for more than two terms?

Also, even though the 22nd amendment was passed during Harry Truman's second term, it did not affect him due to the fact that it passed during his administration. Truman was going to run for a third term during the 1952 election, but dropped out because of his unpopularity.

yeah. But then again he did not actually serve two full terms. He took over the presidency in April 1945, when FDR passed away. And then in '48 he ran for a full term, won it, and served it out.

However, I still understand that he was unaffected by the 22nd amendment. :)

yeah. But then again he did not actually serve two full terms. He took over the presidency in April 1945, when FDR passed away. And then in '48 he ran for a full term, won it, and served it out.

However, I still understand that he was unaffected by the 22nd amendment. :)

Actually, when a Vice President assumes the Presidency when a President dies in office...the time they serve until an election isn't technically considered a first term.

It's just like LBJ when JFk was assassinated...he ran for election in 1964, he could have ran for re-election in 1968 but didn't. However, if LBJ ran for re-election in 1968 and won...he could have run AGAIN in 1972 and thus would have gotten to serve until 1977. So he would have been President from November 22, 1963 until January 20, 1977 (13 years, 1 month, 29 days). LBJ died, in our timeline, in 1973 though :P.

Teddy Roosevelt is a complicated case.

If you judge him solely by his accomplishments...he was a good to great President.

However, if you judge him based of his beliefs and morality...then yeah...he's not great in that department. He thought that Africans Americans should stay in their place and he believed in the superiority of "the Anglo-Saxon race". He also urged people to embrace “the clear instinct for race selfishness.” He advocated imperialism by saying, “It is wholly impossible to avoid conflicts with the weaker races.”

I mean...we named teddy bears after this guy :-\\.


I'm not surprised that he was racist. I mean, yeah, he was very competent, as a president. But yeah, bigoted!

Actually, when a Vice President assumes the Presidency when a President dies in office...the time they serve until an election isn't technically considered a first term.

That's what I thought. It's only a partial term.



It's just like LBJ when JFk was assassinated...he ran for election in 1964, he could have ran for re-election in 1968 but didn't. However, if LBJ ran for re-election in 1968 and won...he could have run AGAIN in 1972 and thus would have gotten to serve until 1977. So he would have been President from November 22, 1963 until January 20, 1977 (13 years, 1 month, 29 days). LBJ died, in our timeline, in 1973 though :P.

Yes, LBJ ran for a full term in 1964 and won it. So his only full term was 1965-69. And yes, he could have run for another term in 1968, but declined to do so, in light of what was going on during that time. So a second term would have run from 1969-73. But he would NOT have been eligible to run again in 1972, because that would be for a third full term, which he wouldn't have been able to do, due to the 22nd Amendment having already taken effect.
Of course, like you said, he passed away in 1973... on the 22nd of January in fact (just two days after Inauguration Day that year).

Yes, LBJ ran for a full term in 1964 and won it. So his only full term was 1965-69. And yes, he could have run for another term in 1968, but declined to do so, in light of what was going on during that time. So a second term would have run from 1969-73. But he would NOT have been eligible to run again in 1972, because that would be for a third full term, which he wouldn't have been able to do, due to the 22nd Amendment having already taken effect.
Of course, like you said, he passed away in 1973... on the 22nd of January in fact (just two days after Inauguration Day that year).

Oh wait, yes..you're correct. I made a mistake :P. However, the point I was trying to make it that LBJ could have been Prez for more than 8 years. He could have been President from November 22, 1963 until January 20, 1973 (9 years, 1 month, 29 days).

Oh wait, yes..you're correct. I made a mistake :P. However, the point I was trying to make it that LBJ could have been Prez for more than 8 years. He could have been President from November 22, 1963 until January 20, 1973 (9 years, 1 month, 29 days).

Right. O0

And the 22nd amendment, in essence, allows a person to serve up to ten years in the presidency.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

LBJ had been in poor health after leaving the presidency anyways, according to his bio on Wiki.

Right. O0

And the 22nd amendment, in essence, allows a person to serve up to ten years in the presidency.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

LBJ had been in poor health after leaving the presidency anyways, according to his bio on Wiki.

Correct O0

My opinion on worst;

1. Woodrow Wilson
2. Franklin Pierce
3. Andrew Johnson
4. Herbert Hoover
5. Warren G Harding

My opinion of the worst ones will certainly include the guy who's currently in office. ::)

My opinion of the worst ones will certainly include the guy who's currently in office. ::)


I'd rather Trump than Wilson.