Why is Richard Nixon as high as 27! he was impeached for fuck sakes.

But I agree that Andrew Johson is second last. He basically tried to reverse everything Abe Lincoln did because he hated blacks.

Polk should be higher. The man was a great president and accomplished all of his tasks in only one term.

Why did Grant jump so high though? I barely remember anything notable coming from his Presidency besides his ineptitude.

Normalizing relations with China.

Getting us out of Vietnam.

He didn't do anything worse then FDR or Lincoln did.

Hell he didn't even do anything worse then George W Bush did.

Theo should be #2! #1 should be Franklin. You know, for that whole the great depression, and WWII thing.
Lincoln was k. Kind of sad that people think the north had no chance of losing the civil war. If Lincoln didn't get re-elected, a truce would have been made. Thus the nation would be divided. Not to mention that it would've only taken a few more victories early on in the northern theatre, which were certainly possible.

Anyway, Kind of weird that they even ranked Zachary Taylor though.

WW2 got us out of the great depression.

All the "New Deal" did was make people feel like there was hope.  Unemployment was still really bad under Franklin until WW2... because all the New Deal adressed was the government.

In contrast Franklin actually constricted private companies making them produce less, and leaving fields fallow, putting a lot of people out of work rather then starting jobs... because the money didn't trickle down from the farming companies who were paid to not grow anything.

Had it not been for WW2... we would of been screwed.

Hence why stimulus plans now don't come close to following the Franklin doctrine and instead focus on private industries. 

WW2 is a very tough nut to crack.  On the one hand... it was a great thing Franklin got us invovled since Hitler was really close to taking over... on the otherhand he did many many underhanded things behind the countries back that the country greatly disagreed with. 

Really he shares a lot of the same crimes as Bush... which is both ironic and funny.

Nixon was good in a lot of ways, but he abused the scope of his office in a lot more ways than just the Watergate scandal. Doing something like that is extremely harmful to America because it causes people to lose faith in the government when they already have so little.

Not to mention many of the things he did were downright illegal and often unconstitutional. He was a prime example of how to run foreign policy though.

Bush Jr, Clinton and Reagan are my favorites.

The same can be said for Lincoln and FDR... and George W Bush.

It seems too many people are willing to put up with having their rights betrayed so long as they like the end result.

In the end the choices you make aren't how history will judge you.... but the effects your choices make.

If you are a complete dick that went against everything the country believes in... you can still be one of the best presidents in the countries history so long as you win a big war.

pretty interstign to see how history affects things.

Also... i'll say it again. There is no way the South could of won the civil war.

There were numerious issues where the North would ALWAYS come out winning in the end, just about no matter who was in charge.

The South had way too many disadvantages.

Had they got in another James Buchanon... sure they would of given up.

But put MOST presidents in Lincolns place. I say most presidents would of pulled it out.

Including even George W Bush.

Which is what i find funny.  Replace Lincoln with George W Bush....

and George W Bush is suddenly America's greatest president because he was at the right place at the right time.  Same stupid decision making skills... but they would of paid off.