• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Worst American Presidents

Worst American President


  • Total voters
    83
Tough choice. Buchanan, Harding, or Coolidge. I can excuse Harding to some extent. He was just stupid and completely unqualified for the job... even he knew it. He wasn't corrupt as much as those he put in important positions were corrupt. Buchanan's lack of leadership and action lead to the Civil War, Coolidge's lack of leadership and action lead to the Great Depression. Hmmm... Buchanan was a life long statesman, having been a Representative, a Senator, and a Secretary of State, and should have known better. I give him a little sympathy because he did not have the kind of personality to be President during the time in which he served, a time that required strong leadership, but that does not excuse his failures.

I agree with this analysis.
 
Could you expand upon this?

After the Civil War when the 13th/14th/15th Amendments were passed, the Republicans (the dominant party in Congress at the time) had every intention of allowing minorities to have the same civil rights that whites had. Most of them envisioned a kind of racial equality like we have today, rather than what we had for the 100 years following the Civil War. Johnson, on the other hand, actively undermined them at every turn and allowed southern states to pass "black codes" (the earliest version of Jim Crow) in direct violation of the 14th Amendment.

"This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government for white men." - Andrew Johnson. And he made good on that promise.
 
Last edited:
Only one other guy, besides me voted for Buchanon? This is fantastic.
 
After the Civil War when the 13th/14th/15th Amendments were passed, the Republicans (the dominant party in Congress at the time) had every intention of allowing minorities to have the same civil rights that whites had. Most of them envisioned a kind of racial equality like we have today, rather than what we had for the 100 years following the Civil War. Johnson, on the other hand, actively undermined them at every turn and allowed southern states to pass "black codes" (the earliest version of Jim Crow) in direct violation of the 14th Amendment.

"This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am President, it shall be a government for white men." - Andrew Johnson. And he made good on that promise.

Err, that wasn't really Andrew Johnson. That was more Rutherford B. Hayes, who ran for the Presidency after Ulysses S. Grant. Hayes' election was deadlocked because of the interests of the Radical Republicans in the North and the Redeemer Democrats of the South. Hayes, a Republican, ended the deadlock with the Compromise of 1877, in which he agreed to pull out federal troops from the Southern states that were backing Republican state governments and protecting African-Americans in the South. It is after Reconstruction, known usually as Redemption by the Southerners who came to power, that the Jim Crow laws were enacted.

Compromise of 1877 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm not saying Andrew Johnson wasn't a racist, nor that he was unsympathetic to the racist South; I'm just saying that Jim Crow didn't really occur during his Presidency, but rather quite after it.
 
Only one other guy, besides me voted for Buchanon? This is fantastic.

That's because his popularity has increased now that he can be watched every weekday on "Morning Joe" on MSNBC.
 
Last edited:
I was under the impression Buchanan was more incompetent than anything. I would have to say Woodrow Wilson. U.S. involvement in WWI, censorship, federal income tax, federal reserve, segregation of the military, Espionage Act 1917, Sedition Act 1918, segregation of federal government, influence in South America, Treaty of Versailles, etc. FDR and Bush are probably close seconds. I haven't been a fan of Obama, but I don't think he has done enough to name him the worst all time. Certainly has the potential though.
 
Nope. The states had/have a right to secede. He had no right to keep the states united by force.

No, the states did not have the right to seceed, therefore he had every right to keep the states united. Firstly, they illegally confiscated federal property. Secondly, read Texas v. White for reference.
 
How are the hyper-partisan hackies voting more than once? Do they all have multiple accounts?

It's actually pretty idiotic. 2 members voted. The other 121 are hyperpartisan trolls trying to skew the vote. It's sad that these people seem to believe that they need to cheat to push their position. Just makes their position all the weaker.
 
I don't know enough to make a decision.

Given my limited knowledge of US presidential history, and taking into account my being too young to notice until the late Bush 41 years, I don't have all that much to go on.

But, allowing for those limitations, I would probably go with one of the following:
  1. FDR, from a "made changes I don't think I agree with standpoint".
  2. James Buchanan, cause even though I know nothing, CC is usually right, and his analysis made sense. :mrgreen:
I truly don't know enough about the others to have any idea, except possibly:
  1. Bush 43 - not a good president, but I doubt the worst.
  2. Obama - I disagree with most of what he has done/is trying to do, but he hasn't completed his presidency yet, so I'm reserving judgment.
 
Why isn't Ford on the list?
 
Why isn't Ford on the list?

Probably because considering he was only President by virtue of being Speaker of the House during Nixon's resignation, he's probably the luckiest President by virtue of just keeping our republic stable during all the fallout of Nixon's corruption, the fall of Saigon, civil unrest, and economic downturns that would plague into the Carter years.
 
Probably because considering he was only President by virtue of being Speaker of the House during Nixon's resignation, he's probably the luckiest President by virtue of just keeping our republic stable during all the fallout of Nixon's corruption, the fall of Saigon, civil unrest, and economic downturns that would plague into the Carter years.

Uhmm he was the V.P. Speaker of the House is third inline:prof
 
The people that chose GWB are amusing.... because there's not one thing that was 'bad' about GWB that The Obama isn't worse.
 
The people that chose GWB are amusing.... because there's not one thing that was 'bad' about GWB that The Obama isn't worse.

Do you already have hindsight on Obama's full first term?
 
Uhmm he was the V.P. Speaker of the House is third inline:prof

I know. I thought that Nixon's V.P. had resigned, and when Nixon resigned Ford stepped in. But apparently what happened was Nixon's V.P. resigned, Ford was appointed as V.P. (and he had previously served as Speaker), and then Nixon resigned. So Ford wasn't elected either as a V.P. or as POTUS.

Fun fact for today! :mrgreen:
 
The people that chose GWB are amusing.... because there's not one thing that was 'bad' about GWB that The Obama isn't worse.

The people who chose EITHER are amusing. To assess one's Presidency, one generally needs a decade afterwards to determine long term impact and some distance from the time.
 
I don't know enough to make a decision.

Given my limited knowledge of US presidential history, and taking into account my being too young to notice until the late Bush 41 years, I don't have all that much to go on.

Here is a link for a pretty good series with regards to the Presidents. It's not a comprehensive view of all the Presidents, but it does give a good look at them. If you want any details, you'll have to go to wikipedia. But all in all, it's a nice place to start.

Amazon.com: The History Channel Presents The Presidents: Edward Herrmann: Movies & TV
 
The complete lack of temporal vision in this thread disturbs me.

125 votes for Obama. Really?
 
No, the states did not have the right to seceed, therefore he had every right to keep the states united. Firstly, they illegally confiscated federal property. Secondly, read Texas v. White for reference.

I think an argument could be made states have the right to secede. Read South Carolina's Declaration of Secession. They make the argument that the states do have the right to secede.

Avalon Project - Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union

Your Texas v. White case is misleading. That was four year after the end of the civil war. There is absolutely no way the Supreme Court rules that a state has the right to secede.
 
Last edited:
Herbert Hoover because he sat back and let the depression happen.
For more recent history George Dubya gets a dishonorable mention.
 
As a pretty solid Republican, Obama is not the worst president. Pierce is the worst; he is a cause of the Civil War. No one on this list has that prize. Learn some history people.
 
As a pretty solid Republican, Obama is not the worst president. Pierce is the worst; he is a cause of the Civil War. No one on this list has that prize. Learn some history people.

probably so but there are so many ways to measure this

1) ineffectiveness as a leader

2) corruption

3) what he did to the country long term or short term

FDR obviously was an effective leader/ however, if you believe in a limited government as envisioned by the founders he was probably the worst in what he did to the country. LBJ is in the same boat-an effective President in terms of getting his way but his long term legacy was harmful to the nation if you have a libertarian viewpoint

Harding was ineffective and surrounded himself with corruption. Grant, a great man had poor choices in friends and his inner circle.
Pierce was a joke and Buchanan made more mistakes than can be counted

NIxon was corrupt but he was an effective president until Watergate and his decision to recognize red China was brilliant

Hoover was ineffective and mishandled a crisis but he was fairly honest.
 
It's a public poll - what did you expect?

Obama cannot be judged yet. Nor can Bush II. How things turn out in Iraq will be a major determinative in how history judges W
 
Back
Top Bottom