He beat out Fillmore, so he's got that going for him.

Poor Dubya -- can't even make "Worst President Evar".

So let's see... the same people who say the historians will judge Bush favorably apparently reject the historians' judgment of FDR. Yeah, that sounds about right.

Wow - it's pretty bad when people say Hoover was better than you. But I imagine that Bush will slip down the list more and more as time goes on.

Benevolent Misanthrope: Wow - it's pretty bad when people say Hoover was better than you. But I imagine that Bush will slip down the list more and more as time goes on.

Yeah, I don't think it's easy to judge how he did when has only been out of office for about a month. I'd say give it 5-10 years before we can make a much better judgement call rather than going with an immediate gut instinct. However I do feel his rating won't improve much.

Still seems a tad too kind to Bush. He's ranked higher than Filmore and William Henry Harrison? I don't understand how anyone can say Harrison was a bad president. He literally died after 39 days. He couldn't do any harm.

He will slip down further on that list. The funniest part is he is rated 25th in "Crisis Leadership." What a crock of shiat.

Bush is ranked 2nd to last in International Relations. He really is ranked last - only W.H. Harrison is behind him, and Harrison really doesn't count for these kidns of rankings.

Much as I enjoy seeing Shrub drubbed and snubbed, that same survey puts Ronald Retard Reagan in the top 10, so I don't see a lot of wisdom or historical perspective represented there.

Also, do I need to point out that Bushy has been out of office less than a month?
If people are stupid enough to remember Reagan fondly, they may yet come to look as favourably on Dubya.
Sad but true.

Canadian Canuck: Benevolent Misanthrope: Wow - it's pretty bad when people say Hoover was better than you. But I imagine that Bush will slip down the list more and more as time goes on.

Yeah, I don't think it's easy to judge how he did when has only been out of office for about a month. I'd say give it 5-10 years before we can make a much better judgement call rather than going with an immediate gut instinct. However I do feel his rating won't improve much.

Don't worry, I have it on good authority that Bush single-handedly kept the Moolim hordes at bay, and it'll totally be evident now that he's gone, y'know. Also, that he had a rock that prevented terrorist attacks.

Canadian Canuck: Yeah, I don't think it's easy to judge how he did when has only been out of office for about a month. I'd say give it 5-10 years before we can make a much better judgement call rather than going with an immediate gut instinct. However I do feel his rating won't improve much.

We don't need 5 more years to figure out that Robert Mugabe or Slobadan Milosovic are really bad leaders. I don't get why Bush needs the time.

ragekage: Also, that he had a rock that prevented terrorist attacks.

Where could I buy this rock?

DamnYankees: He literally died after 39 days. He couldn't do any harm.

That's the problem, he didn't spend enough time on the field to generate any numbers at all.

Think he should be put to the side for these kind of comparisons.

baka-san: That's the problem, he didn't spend enough time on the field to generate any numbers at all.

Think he should be put to the side for these kind of comparisons.

Either remove him or he has to be average.

Procedural Texture: If people are stupid enough to remember Reagan fondly, they may yet come to look as favourably on Dubya.

Maybe, but doubtful. Even in early stage Alzheimer's, Reagan could speak in eloquent complete sentences and at least give the appearance of some intelligence. No amount of turd polishing can fix that for W.

Ronald Reagan tenth best, what kind of revisionist history is that?

The man broke the law, and in my opinion that traitor Oliver North should still be in prison.

Funny how Presidents Nixon, Reagan, and G.W. Bush felt that the laws of The U.S.A. did not apply to them...and what a coincidence they are all Republicans.

Findings from the Iran-Contra Report:



The President himself told the public that the U.S. Government had no connection to the Hasenfus airplane. He told the public that early reports of arms sales for hostages had 'no foundation.' He told the public that the United States had not traded arms for hostages. He told the public that the United States had not condoned the arms sales by Israel to Iran, when in fact he had approved them and signed a finding, later destroyed by Poindexter, recording his approval. All of these statements by the President were wrong. Thus, the question whether the President knew of the diversion is not conclusive on the issue of his responsibility. The President created or at least tolerated an environment where those who did know of the diversion believed with certainty that they were carrying out the President's policies.

This same environment enabled a secretary who shredded, smuggled and altered documents to tell the committees that 'sometimes you have to go above the written law'; and it enabled Admiral Poindexter to testify that 'frankly, we were willing to take some risks with the law.' It was in such an environment that former officials of the N.S.C. staff and their private agents could lecture the committees that a 'rightful cause' justifies any means, that lying to Congress and other officials in the executive branch itself is acceptable when the ends are just, and that Congress is to blame for passing laws that run counter to Administration policy. What may aptly be called the 'cabal of the zealots' was in charge.

In a constitutional democracy, it is not true, as one official maintained, that 'When you take the king's shilling, you do the king's bidding.' The idea of monarchy was rejected here 200 years ago and since then, the law -not any official or ideology - has been paramount. For not instilling this precept in his staff, for failing to take care that the law reigned supreme, the President bears the responsibility.

Link (new window)

baka-san: DamnYankees: [Harrison] literally died after 39 days. He couldn't do any harm.

That's the problem, he didn't spend enough time on the field to generate any numbers at all.

Think he should be put to the side for these kind of comparisons.

Why? He's the only one Bush has a chance to be ranked higher than! Don't be revising history!

About the Reagan ranking, its interest took look where he ranked in the polls taken right after he left office:

1990 - Ranked 22nd of 41
1994 - Ranked 20th of 42
1996 - Ranked 26th of 42

Reagan has greatly benefitted from being completely sainted by the modern GOP.

Yeah, Bush really did a bad job, especially with the 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center a little over six months since he came in office.
What he should have done with terrorism is just roll over and take it...like that awesome Bill Clinton did with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; bombings on an American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole; and HIS failure at capturing Osama bin Laden - an objective since Clinon's Presidency - even though Sudan offered to capture him and turn him over to the U.S. in 1996, 1998, and 2000.
Yeah, that's what Bush should have done and then we wouldn't have been in this mess...

Its to early to tell but the early returns are not good.

DamnYankees: Think he should be put to the side for these kind of comparisons.

Either remove him or he has to be average.

He never did anything, he got sick during his inauguration speech.

He should be a side not in comparisons.

DamnYankees: Still seems a tad too kind to Bush. He's ranked higher than Filmore and William Henry Harrison? I don't understand how anyone can say Harrison was a bad president. He literally died after 39 days. He couldn't do any harm.

Except by being a dumb ass (performing his inauguration outside on a cold wet day without wearing a coat) he allowed John Tyler (the 8th worst President) to take power.

steelpeg: Yeah, Bush really did a bad job, especially with the 2001 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center a little over six months since he came in office.
What he should have done with terrorism is just roll over and take it...like that awesome Bill Clinton did with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; bombings on an American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole; and HIS failure at capturing Osama bin Laden - an objective since Clinon's Presidency - even though Sudan offered to capture him and turn him over to the U.S. in 1996, 1998, and 2000.
Yeah, that's what Bush should have done and then we wouldn't have been in this mess...

So, how about you tell me how horrid this survey is that places Lord Ronnie at 10th best President? Oh, maybe they got it "right" with Raygun, and just missed all those wonderful things that W did? Or are you just pissed that Herr Beej was ranked so highly? Either way, if you could make sure and divert your tears into the tear cup, which will be collected into tear buckets, emptied into the tear sluice, and fed into the Republican tear irrigation system, which we'll use to grow food for dark people and suchlike, so they can be put to good use.

In addition to the entirely accurate historical facts he presents, steelpeg correctly points out that Bush's Presidency was one of tragic victimhood and thus should be rated on a generous curve.

Four of the top five were somewhere between "horrible" and "traitor," so there's hope for GW.

baka-san: He never did anything, he got sick during his inauguration speech.

Code_Archeologist: Except by being a dumb ass (performing his inauguration outside on a cold wet day without wearing a coat) he allowed John Tyler (the 8th worst President) to take power.


Common misperception. He didn't get sick during the inauguration. People just thought he did because they didn't know medicine as well back then. There's no way someone goes a month between being in a cold place and getting pneumonia. He was probably just stressed out and remember he was really old - 68 years old when elected.

DamnYankees: baka-san: He never did anything, he got sick during his inauguration speech.

Code_Archeologist: Except by being a dumb ass (performing his inauguration outside on a cold wet day without wearing a coat) he allowed John Tyler (the 8th worst President) to take power.


Common misperception. He didn't get sick during the inauguration. People just thought he did because they didn't know medicine as well back then. There's no way someone goes a month between being in a cold place and getting pneumonia. He was probably just stressed out and remember he was really old - 68 years old when elected.

Huh. I always just assumed that he had a terrible cold and then was fighting it off for a month before finally succumbing.

Benevolent Misanthrope: Huh. I always just assumed that he had a terrible cold and then was fighting it off for a month before finally succumbing.

The evidence we have (from what I've read about it) was that he got sick on day 30 of his Presidency, fought it for 9 days and then died.

Pneumonia isn't an outgrowth of the common cold - its not like if you have a cold long enough you just end up with penumonia.

DamnYankees: Still seems a tad too kind to Bush. He's ranked higher than Filmore and William Henry Harrison? I don't understand how anyone can say Harrison was a bad president. He literally died after 39 days. He couldn't do any harm.

This.

Take Wm. H. Harrison and Garfield off the list.

Also: The two Cleveland terms should be ranked separately.

Way too early. Wait until the cockroaches scuttle out of the woodwork now that they don't have to fear for their jobs. Can you say book deal? Lots of delicious nummys are waiting to be discovered.

shanrick: Way too early. Wait until the cockroaches scuttle out of the woodwork now that they don't have to fear for their jobs. Can you say book deal? Lots of delicious nummys are waiting to be discovered.

Wouldn't that only drop his rank?

DamnYankees: Benevolent Misanthrope: Huh. I always just assumed that he had a terrible cold and then was fighting it off for a month before finally succumbing.

The evidence we have (from what I've read about it) was that he got sick on day 30 of his Presidency, fought it for 9 days and then died.

Pneumonia isn't an outgrowth of the common cold - its not like if you have a cold long enough you just end up with penumonia.

Well, it can be - happened to me. I had a terrible chest cold, developed an opportunistic infection, then had enough trouble from it that another opportunistic pneumonia infection developed. If I'd seen a doc when I should have, it wouldn't have happened. So, I was thinking kind of the same thing - antibiotics weren't available then, so maybe he caught cold and it became a series of infections that he couldn't fight off.

Anyway, not. You learn something new every day.

Seeing how Jimmy Carter dropped 3 spots nearly 30 years after his presidency ended, I'd have to take this with a grain of salt...

I'm waiting until 2029, when Howard Zinn updates his history...

That list is bullshiat, Obama is the greatest President and his name is not even on the ranking list.

Haha, ouch! That's gotta hurt.

shanrick: Way too early. Wait until the cockroaches scuttle out of the woodwork now that they don't have to fear for their jobs. Can you say book deal? Lots of delicious nummys are waiting to be discovered.

The streets will flow with Kool-Aid..

After 4 years of Obama, the Bush presidency will be known as the good old days.

Harrison deserves to be above him. At the very least, you can give Harrison credit for not farking anything up, aside from the dying part.

All: We are the mediocre presidents.
You won't find our faces on dollars or on cents!
There's Taylor, there's Tyler,
There's Fillmore and there's Hayes.
There's William Henry Harrison,
Harrison: I died in thirty days!
All: We... are... the...
Adequate, forgettable,
Occasionally regrettable
Caretaker presidents of the U-S-A!

SkinnyHead: After 4 years of Obama, the Bush presidency will be known as the good old days.

For the good ole boys, no doubt.

Consider how unpopular Lincoln was during his presidency, and you'll see Bush has a fair chance to become much more popular in hindsight.

Historians. Because you only think you know.

"History" is now a month and a half ago?

The whole point of allowing history to make the verdict is to wait long enough so that the event is actually history. Three weeks ago is not history.

Secret Master of All Flatulence: Consider how unpopular Lincoln was during his presidency, and you'll see Bush has a fair chance to become much more popular in hindsight.

You call a 1 out of 44 chance fair? I think I may have found my new poker buddy.

/Bush is no Lincoln
//Bush is barely a Hoover
///did Hoover's ratings improve markedly over time?
////uh no

DamnYankees: He's ranked higher than Filmore

And Fillmore was actually successful in the other jobs he did outside of being president...

"History will condemn you, Mr. Chamberlain. I know, because I shall write the history..."
Winston Churchill

It's a bit early to judge. It'll take a good 10 years from now to find out if Iraq and Afghanistan worked out well. We're still in Yugoslavia after all and it's still not sorted out enough to tell if Clinton was right.

Benevolent Misanthrope: it's pretty bad when people say Hoover was better than you.

To be fair, Hoover was a man of his time who did what seemed right at the time to a man in his place. Sure in retrospect it was the wrong thing to do but that itself doesn't make him a truly bad president. While he gaffed with the economy in a crunch, he himself was a strong proponent of reforming government so it would provide for people and not bend over backwards to let companies do whatever they want etc.

ScubaDude1960: Four of the top five were somewhere between "horrible" and "traitor,"

Oh I'd love to know how you decided that.

johnsoninca: Seeing how Jimmy Carter dropped 3 spots nearly 30 years after his presidency ended, I'd have to take this with a grain of salt...

Keep in mind historians also change their opinions as time goes by. I've seen some historians who have Theodore Roosevelt ahead of Franklin.

Smeggy Smurf: It's a bit early to judge. It'll take a good 10 years from now to find out if Iraq and Afghanistan worked out well. We're still in Yugoslavia after all and it's still not sorted out enough to tell if Clinton was right.

So at what point are we allowed to say an invasion is bad? Seems that when Saddam invaded Kuwait we didn't take a wait and see approach.

boo hoo hooo liberal media....boo hoo hoo conspiracy... boo hoo hoo (some parroted Limbaugh quote)... liberul libtards....boo hooo hoooo.

/and so forth.