Really, 46 percent of Americans believe Reagan & Kennedy were greater than FDR, Lincoln and GW?

[Drunken Irishman]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/114292/Best-President-Lincoln-Par-Reagan-Kennedy.aspx

Kennedy was a good president and maybe could have been great, but he wasn't great. He wasn't great because his term was too short and probably wouldn't be idolized like this if it hadn't been for his untimely death.

Reagan? Well he's similarly celebrated much like Kennedy. You can debate whether or not he was one of the most influential presidents, but even then, you can't put him at the top of that list.

Then it's Abe. Mr. Lincoln comes it third, behind two of the more recent presidents. No way does Lincoln deserve to be third on any list. The lowest he should be is 2nd and definitely not behind Reagan or Kennedy.

As for FDR, I think his numbers have actually gone up, as last year he ranked 5th and only grabbed 8 percent.



Reagan and Kennedy seem to flip back and forth as to who is the greatest, but it's interesting Clinton's name failed to make this list, or at least the top-five like last year.

So why did Roosevelt's name increase? Probably with all the economic discussions and the fact the New Deal was once again brought up. If you look further at their rankings, though, FDR's second highest age-group is the youth (18-34) at 19%. His highest, obviously, is the elderly, which is the two lowest for Reagan.



What this tells me is that those who lived during FDR are more inclined to vote for him, but that also he has a strong showing among the younger generation. Which up until this poll, I didn't think was possible.

Then there is poor George Washington, who came in fifth with only 9%. He was good enough to be our founding president, but I guess not good enough to crack the top-three, even though most historians put him up there with Lincoln and FDR.

So this just goes to show that like everything, these polls are nothing more than a popularity and name recognition contest. Americans probably will consistently rank Kennedy higher, but once the Reagan generation (35-64) die out, his numbers won't be lasting. Unlike say FDR and even poor Washington.

Clinton? Well he had made this list often in the past since leaving the WH, but I have a feeling the scars of the 2008 primary campaign have yet to heal and it shows here.

[Captain Hilts]

1. JFK and Reagan had "style" that people let permit to block out logic.

Form over function.

And memories THIS long. The Greatest Films Ever Made lists are dominated by films made in the last 25 years.

[Drunken Irishman]

3. I agree, which is why the more we move from them, the more likely their #s will drop.

Especially for Reagan.

Kennedy will always have a place in America's hearts, even for those who weren't alive. So many people have this built up perception about Kennedy, mostly because of his death and lavish lifestyle, that I don't think that could ever be changed.

Reagan, though, was not killed in office and probably only sees support because he was the last perceived "great" president. Once things change and we move away from his presidency, his numbers will most likely drop.

[Captain Hilts]

12. Kennedy's reputation is completely out of synch with a lot of the reality.

As a Sovietologist - I know, a crazy term - it is universally accepted that JFK's coming across to Khrushchev at a meeting as an overgrown teenager is what emboldened Khrushchev to plant missiles in Cuba. If Averill Harriman is president, that doesn't happen.

I felt really uncomfortable with the whole "JFK legacy" stuff during the Obama campaing for several reasons. First is all the assassination stuff. I am just old enough to remember that day.

Second, and most important, is that JFK's weaknesses are Obama's strengths. Obama is deliberate. He is cautious. JFK was brash and reckless. This is why his handling of the the Cuban Missile Crisis is so studied: JFK acted completely against character in dealing with it. That was a good thing.

Third, JFK ran as a fear monger - the "missile gap" with the Soviet Union, etc.

[Drunken Irishman]

21. Maybe Kennedy was growing into the presidency by that time.

Some presidents enter office with the belief they can be reckless and nothing will happen. He was handed his ass after the Bay of Pigs and nearly lost it all.

But his poise during the Cuban Missile Crisis definitely was needed.

Could you imagine Nixon in a similar situation? Oh boy.

[Captain Hilts]

24. Yes, I think he had a learning curve.

In Political Science, JFK and Nixon are paired because they had very similar ways of making decisions punctuated by recklessness.

Nixon very well might have taken the same path. He also wasn't as angry and as bitter had he won in '60 as the 'active negative' that attained the presidency in '68. The whole country was 'active negative' by then.

[WI_DEM]

8. That is pretty much it.

[Davis_X_Machina]

2. Recent presidents do better on these things...

...the real superstars and real losers excepted.

[Drunken Irishman]

5. Which speaks volumes for Roosevelt almost tying Reagan/Lincoln.

I mean, he's been out of office almost a lifetime now and he's still making these lists.

Can't say the same for some other possible greats like Wilson, Truman and even Eisenhower.

[Captain Hilts]

19. I'm lost on why Wilson gets on 'great' lists. nt

[Deep13]

4. Lincoln & FDR are tied for 1st place in my mind.

Lincoln had the greater crisis, but FDR just did more and over a longer time. I am no fan of Reagan, but he did do a lot even if I disapprove of most of it. And he pretty much defined national politics from 1981 until this year. I really can't say that for Clinton who was a competent manager, but not much else. JFK might have been great, but he just did not have time to do it. Still, I think he did more good mthan Reagan and will forever be remembered as the driving force of American space exploration.

[Drunken Irishman]

6. Obama definitely has the makings of being the left's Reagan.

In terms of shaping policy.

There is no denying Reagan's influence on American government, good or bad.

For all the work FDR did creating the New Deal, Reagan put an equal effort in as president to defeat it.

But the advantage FDR has over every president, he not only had to deal with crisis at home, but abroad and led this country to its greatest military victory.

[Deep13]

9. I'll take FDR in a wheelchair over Reagan on a horse anyday.

Paraphrasing Jesse Jackson here.

[mitchum]

34. But I'll take Reagan in a cold dark grave over FDR running a marathon

[lxlxlxl]

11. Why is the USSR going to dissolve again?

Reagan's appeal has nothing to do with him or his style, but the fact that Gorbachev instituted Perestroika during his tenure as President and gave Americans a sense of accomplishment and victory that they did not deserve.

I strongly believe that conservatism in this country only acts the way they do because they think they single handedly won the cold war. Conservatism still thinks repeating the word freedom over and over again will win all political debates, and ignoring the blatant evil they perpetrate (Involvement in South America, Supporting Saddam, Iraq War, Afghanistan) is somehow a sign of strength.

[Captain Hilts]

16. We think we're the cause and reason for everything. The USSR began its slide...

in the late 60s. Would have happened anyway.

[Drunken Irishman]

18. On the domestic front, Reagan was the most influencial president since FDR.

As mentioned by another poster, he dominated politics from 1980 until Obama took office. His appeal to conservatives goes beyond just the Cold War and into the fact he worked to overturn everything Roosevelt worked for during his terms in office.

[RaleighNCDUer]

29. Of course, influential does not equal great.

The only thing great about Reagan was the magnitude of the disaster his ideology has created for the US.

It was all because he was a weak-minded fool who fell under the malevolent influence of his second wife, for whom he divorced not only his first wife but also his Democratic New-Deal principles, which he had embraced up till then.

[Captain Hilts]

13. Yes, but he's not really 'left', is he? nt

[Drunken Irishman]

15. Yup, I'd say he is.

At least left of the country's center.

[Captain Hilts]

17. We'll just have to disagree.

A great conversation you've started in this thread.

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. I will grant that Reagan was one of the most influential presidents - possibly in

the top five, but as for 'greatest' he is down there with Grant and Buchanan. His terms were a paradigm shift for how the public viewed government, but that did not make him great.

His claim was "government is the problem" and then set about proving it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. What's so great about George Washington?

I wouldn't even put him in the top ten.

[Captain Hilts]

14. One thing: he refused to make the presidency a stepping stone to being king.

Otherwise, I actually agree with you.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. Not doing something horrible is hardly a noble act.

[Captain Hilts]

23. I agree, and he doesn't make my 'greatest' list either.

But, GWB has made me appreciate acts of omission rather than acts of commission.

[RaleighNCDUer]

22. He was THE most influential person in the United States.

And if he had opted for a crown, the US would have followed him. If he had chosen to serve as 'President for life', the people would have let him. By stepping down after two terms he established the precedent - not defined in the constitution - that the president serves only two terms, thus keeping the democracy continually renewed.

He balanced the US between the empires of England, France and Spain, any of which could have invaded and conquered the country which was appallingly weak in its first 30 years - can't forget that England still owned Canada, the Spanish and French were contesting for the Mississippi valley, and the Spanish still had designs on Florida which they had possessed for 200 years before the US was formed. He was more than aware that the only reason the states gained independence was because of the ongoing rivalry between the three superpowers, each working against the other two - and THAT was his reason for warning about getting tied up in entangling alliances - he knew that if we chose the wrong side, France, for example, that when the others ganged up to take France down that we'd go down with it.

He pulled the country together after the divisiveness of the Confederation, when each separate state considered itself an independent nation. It was his influence that turned a loose confederation of independent states into a nation.

I'd rank him #3, after Roosevelt and Lincoln, in that order.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

25. Ah, that's a bunch of hooey.

"And if he had opted for a crown, the US would have followed him."

1. That's a load of bull. The states had trouble even agreeing to the Constitution. They never would have allowed a monarch.

2. Deciding not to become a dictator is hardly something worth celebrating.

"If he had chosen to serve as 'President for life', the people would have let him. By stepping down after two terms he established the precedent - not defined in the constitution - that the president serves only two terms, thus keeping the democracy continually renewed."

That's neither here nor there.

[Zynx]

32. The country could have easily collapsed horribly in its infancy.

He managed to make the system work. It very easily could have flown apart at the seams. When I read more about the subject, I was slightly astonished as to how weak the system was.

[fugop]

26. Split vote

I think the responses here are just the result of a split vote. I think Dems probably split between Lincoln (who's a Republican, but only in name), FDR and JFK. I think the GOP flocked straight to Ronny, with maybe a few who have consciences peeling off to Lincoln. And then the GW fans. But seriously, when I first saw this poll, I immediately assumed the Dems were overrepresented and wound up splitting their vote. That's my only justification for Reagan beating everyone else on that list out.

[Still Sensible]

27. It is a failure in young people learning history and civics

that leaves someone like Thomas Jefferson off of this top five list and puts George Washington fifth. Obviously those people don't really have an understanding of what these men did.

It is certainly arguable that Ronald Reagan and FDR were two of the most influential presidents because they both initiated seismic redirections that lasted for decades in politics and policy.

IMO JFK was a potentially great president that did begin a movement as well, but the movement he initiated wasn't so much a change of direction in American politics as it was an acceleration of some of the directions that were 'born' under FDR. I am one of those JFK kids (as has been talked about in other threads) and was six years old when he was inaugurated.

[totodeinhere]

39. A lot of people may not have voted for FDR because he supported concentration camps for Japanese...

Americans and did nothing to fight Jim Crow in the South. His attempt to pack the Supreme Court did not get him any points either.

[jsamuel]

28. note that FDR wins among those over 65 (were alive durring his presidency)

they remember

Seems like the young folk trend towards Lincoln. The 35-64 sure love them some Reagan.

[MadBadger]

30. I'm not positive, but I think most Americans were not around when Washington/Lincoln were Preisdent

Just a hunch.

[GOPBasher]

31. That's ridiculous. n/t

[Blue_Tires]

33. that poll sucks

and reagan doesn't even belong on the list...kennedy either... (i had a much longer post but the site ate it)

[PBS Poll-435]

35. Agreed

(And I HATE when you type out a very thoughtful, deliberate, and intelligent reply and then it disappears!)

x(

[Jennicut]

36. Ewww, I do not get the 35 to 64 year olds in love with Reagan, I am 33

I was a child when he was president but even I saw him as befuddled and confused at the end of his term, during the Iran contra hearings. I think Lincoln #1, FDR #2, GW #3. Lincoln is the only President who had to deal with a civil war and at the end of the day, he kept the country together. FDR obviously took us through a terrible depression and beginning of WWII and GW was the first president and no one gave him a blueprint but he made the presidency what it is today.

[demo dutch]

38. They've been spoonfed for decades

[RaleighNCDUer]

41. Generally agree, but with a caveat -

Lincoln dealt with a civil war.

Roosevelt prevented one.

Under a different president we might have seen fascist and communist militias fighting in the streets during the 30s, which would have completely changed the course of WW2. It came VERY close to that, despite the Hollywood image we have now of that time.

That's why I have FDR as #1, and Lincoln as #2.

[treestar]

42. The only possible reason I can think of is their age

The only fondness I have for the Reagan years might be he was President when I was young. You like the decade when you were in your late teens to early 30s.

[demo dutch]

37. People don't have a clue, they just cite who they've heard about the most

[old mark]

40. Reagan performed well onTV.

He is the best the Publicans have to offer, and they lied about what a great President he was.
Really they haven't had any outstanding presidential materiel in the entire 20th century and very little before except for Lincoln.


mark

[sofa king]

43. I'll bet 46% of Americans can't name five Presidents.

And memories are short. People remember who was President in their youth, when everything was sunny and great and optimistic. I have no doubt that in 30 years, that idiot 23% of Americans will still consider * to be one of the "greatest." And the rest of us will add "criminal" to that and believe it, too.

[vinylsolution]

44. Such is the power of the Reagan myth....

Never forget the huge crimes that happened on Reagan's watch: