timschochet
Footballguy
And who are the 4 from pop culture? Marilyn Monroe and Madonna and who else?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
timschochet's thread- Mods, please move this thread to the Politics Subforum, thank you (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
dparker713
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
I see. I guess King. Gershwin was a composer, not really a celebrity. I don't really think of him that way, but OK.
timschochet
Footballguy
Anyhow it's early times yet. Lemme check my list and do a pop culture count...
timschochet
Footballguy
OK, of the entire 100, I counted 15 that encompass pop culture. I don't think that's too many.
timschochet
Footballguy
As far as before 20th century- of the total 100, I count 35 who were famous before 1900.
Uwe Blab
Footballguy
Again, awesome write-up. I know we are separating the worst from the almost worst, but based on the tone and arguments in your write-up, Buchanan came across as absolute worst. Worse than Pierce.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865)
Public Acumen/Persuasion
When Lincoln finally took office as President of the United States, there was a real question of what exactly the United States were. In order to pull the country out of the depths it was in, it would take someone who was a master of public speaking, persuading people, leaders and nations, who had the skills to deal with a crisis unlike no other, who could get the Congress to work with him in the midst of the turmoil, who could manage an economy when half of the country didn’t put into the till, who understood the times he was leading in and who could serve in them and rise above them, and who could muster the fullest picture of rhetoric, power, leadership and determination to make it all work. We’ve had a small small number of men in this office who could do that. And Abraham Lincoln may have been the best.
Lincoln should be created with 4 of our top 5 greatest speeches in American history and while that might be up for debate, you cannot debate that he is credited with the greatest. His Cooper Union speech is remarkable, his House Divided speech was masterful, His Second Inaugural was brilliant and his Gettysburg Address is not just America’s greatest political speech – it might just be the greatest political speech ever delivered. If Lincoln doesn’t get a 10 here, no one does.
War & Crisis
Lincoln fought the civil war. Since that could take pages and pages and pages and pages, we can make it easy. When Lincoln took office, the country might not have existed for very long. When he was taken from us, the civil war was won and the United States would endure. He gets a 10 here as well.
Economy
Trying to keep an economy moving in the midst of all out civil war is near impossible. Yet Lincoln did it. He supported and signed the Homestead Act which opened up cheap land in the west for settlement, he signed an act to build a college with federal grants in each state, he signed the final bill that created and funded a transcontinential railway, he signed several revenue acts and ultimate supported and enforced the nation’s first income tax as a way to pay for the war. In the midst of the worst crisis in our nation’s history, Lincoln managed to actually keep the government functioning and supplied the army to protect the Union.
Foreign Policy
Throughout the entirety of the war, Lincoln had to deal with the south trying to get England to support them, either publically or through supplies. Lincoln effectively blockaded the southern ports causing problems with England and suffocating southern supply lines but England wasn’t happy about that either. Eventually, the British tried to push their own neutrality in allowing American and rebel ships into their ports, but by walking the thin line of neutrality, they actually did what Lincoln needed them to do which was not recognize the confederacy as a nation. For several years, Lincoln worked tirelessly to keep foreign powers from recognizing the south. He gave, he took, he conceded certain arrests of confederate ships and he did everything possible to keep England from openly supporting the Confederacy. And in the end, when British public opinion was so overwhelmingly anti-slave, Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation (great timing – and it was not just luck) which made the anti-slavery cause clear for the British people to see. Once that was issued, England could never support the confederacy and the hopes of the south in getting that recognition were destroyed.
Executive Skills/Congress
Read Team of Rivals. Twice. Then sit back and truly think about what he did. Lincoln would get a 10 here simply for that. It was a remarkable stroke of political genius. Congress also worked well with Lincoln and it did help that the south wasn’t there to fight him like they did all past Presidents. But in the end, Lincoln ran the government and the war about as well as possible, and eventually won the war. The team of rivals that he built, to a man, regarded him as a great man. And when your rivals do that, your political skill is easy to define.
Justice/Rights
This is an interesting topic for Lincoln. He arrested newspapermen during the war. Not good. He wasn’t a anti-slavery person by any stretch. Not good. He suspended habeas corpus and in many ways was a tyrant when it came to civil rights during the war. Which isn’t good. Except that the Constitution granted him the power to do what he did given the times. Books have been written examining this aspect of his time in office that will do a far better job that I will here. You could give him a 3 here because of the true lack of civil rights that many people had during the war, you could give him a 2 for stating that he would allow slavery if kept the union, export all slaves out of the country if it would save the Union, enforce certain pro-slavery laws if it would save the Union, and so on. You could give him a 3 for ignoring Roger Taney and his Supreme Court. But you could also give him a 10 for the Emancipation Proclamation. You could give him a 9 for the reconstruction plans he had which would have been peaceful to the south and not draconian leading to 100 years of racial strife in this nation.
You can also give him 10 for his iron determination to save the Union above any other policy or thought. If a nation run by the people couldn’t survive, what does that say about nations run by people? This was the question he asked of us at Gettysburg. This is the question that overrides the entirety of his administration. If the Civil War resulted in America being broken in half or worse, what does that say about government of the people, by the people and for the people. Some would and have argued that it would mean nothing more than people can choose their own destiny. But Lincoln believed that there was something more there, and in fighting the war and winning the war on the terms he ultimately defined, he made is clear for this country that the ultimate Justice as defined by the Constitution is the longevity and growth of the Constitution itself, and the nation that it governs.
I’m going to give him an 8 here. I would personally give him a 10 but he gets some hits. All of them war measures. But we are going to hit a few more guys for their war measures and consistency is important in the raw scores as much as possible.
Context
[SIZE=11pt]Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt] But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.[/SIZE]
Conclusion
Abraham Lincoln was the great man we needed for the Civil War. He was everything that Buchanan and Pierce were not. He was everything that Johnson was not. He was everything we want in a President at a time of significant crisis. He was 1865’s George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. He could lead, he could write/speak, and he could create policy. Like FDR he had a resolve that governed everything else. And he was willing to accept mistake or error, learn from it, and grow from it – a personality trait that far too few politicians have. On persuasion he gets a 10, on crisis he gets a 10, economy 9, foreign policy 10, Congress 10, civil rights 8 and context 10. 67 total points.
The initial raw ranking puts him ahead of George Washington and many people do. Which is odd when you think about it because as we said in the beginning, the measure of every President is based in language that Washington created. Washington faced a crisis – creating a nation. Lincoln’s crisis was saving that nation. Washington tried to stand against politics and lead where he thought was right. Lincoln tried to stand against the times and what seemed like futility and adhere to the nation that Washington birthed. In many respects, putting Lincoln over Washington is wrong. Like saying that Moses is a more important Christian than Christ. Except it’s not. What Lincoln did is finish what Washington started. The slavery question was always a problem. Our first generation of leaders couldn’t figure out how to solve it. The next generation made it worse, and the entire problem fell into Lincoln’s lap. This uneducated, Kentucky born lawyer hick whose only physical attribute was his height had an awful speaking voice, ugly face, robotic mannerisms, ill fitting clothes and poor beginnings rose above everything and led this country in its darkest time. He would never be elected today. He wouldn’t have been elected in Jefferson’s time either.
But in his time, in that most important moment in our history where everything could have been lost, he was elected. And he lead. And he won. And our nation exists because of him. All its warts, all its failures, all its ugly foreign policy, all of its mistakes and errors in judgment, all of its inventions, all of its beauty, all of its goodness, all of its greatness and all of its existence today is here because Lincoln fought for it with a resolve that we just don’t get enough of in our leaders. And he ensured that a nation of the people with all of their prejudices and beliefs, could be governed by the people with all of their weakness and greatness in an effort to lead for the people and their eternal quest for freedom, liberty and justice. Thank god we had Abraham Lincoln.
Public Acumen/Persuasion
When Lincoln finally took office as President of the United States, there was a real question of what exactly the United States were. In order to pull the country out of the depths it was in, it would take someone who was a master of public speaking, persuading people, leaders and nations, who had the skills to deal with a crisis unlike no other, who could get the Congress to work with him in the midst of the turmoil, who could manage an economy when half of the country didn’t put into the till, who understood the times he was leading in and who could serve in them and rise above them, and who could muster the fullest picture of rhetoric, power, leadership and determination to make it all work. We’ve had a small small number of men in this office who could do that. And Abraham Lincoln may have been the best.
Lincoln should be created with 4 of our top 5 greatest speeches in American history and while that might be up for debate, you cannot debate that he is credited with the greatest. His Cooper Union speech is remarkable, his House Divided speech was masterful, His Second Inaugural was brilliant and his Gettysburg Address is not just America’s greatest political speech – it might just be the greatest political speech ever delivered. If Lincoln doesn’t get a 10 here, no one does.
War & Crisis
Lincoln fought the civil war. Since that could take pages and pages and pages and pages, we can make it easy. When Lincoln took office, the country might not have existed for very long. When he was taken from us, the civil war was won and the United States would endure. He gets a 10 here as well.
Economy
Trying to keep an economy moving in the midst of all out civil war is near impossible. Yet Lincoln did it. He supported and signed the Homestead Act which opened up cheap land in the west for settlement, he signed an act to build a college with federal grants in each state, he signed the final bill that created and funded a transcontinential railway, he signed several revenue acts and ultimate supported and enforced the nation’s first income tax as a way to pay for the war. In the midst of the worst crisis in our nation’s history, Lincoln managed to actually keep the government functioning and supplied the army to protect the Union.
Foreign Policy
Throughout the entirety of the war, Lincoln had to deal with the south trying to get England to support them, either publically or through supplies. Lincoln effectively blockaded the southern ports causing problems with England and suffocating southern supply lines but England wasn’t happy about that either. Eventually, the British tried to push their own neutrality in allowing American and rebel ships into their ports, but by walking the thin line of neutrality, they actually did what Lincoln needed them to do which was not recognize the confederacy as a nation. For several years, Lincoln worked tirelessly to keep foreign powers from recognizing the south. He gave, he took, he conceded certain arrests of confederate ships and he did everything possible to keep England from openly supporting the Confederacy. And in the end, when British public opinion was so overwhelmingly anti-slave, Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation (great timing – and it was not just luck) which made the anti-slavery cause clear for the British people to see. Once that was issued, England could never support the confederacy and the hopes of the south in getting that recognition were destroyed.
Executive Skills/Congress
Read Team of Rivals. Twice. Then sit back and truly think about what he did. Lincoln would get a 10 here simply for that. It was a remarkable stroke of political genius. Congress also worked well with Lincoln and it did help that the south wasn’t there to fight him like they did all past Presidents. But in the end, Lincoln ran the government and the war about as well as possible, and eventually won the war. The team of rivals that he built, to a man, regarded him as a great man. And when your rivals do that, your political skill is easy to define.
Justice/Rights
This is an interesting topic for Lincoln. He arrested newspapermen during the war. Not good. He wasn’t a anti-slavery person by any stretch. Not good. He suspended habeas corpus and in many ways was a tyrant when it came to civil rights during the war. Which isn’t good. Except that the Constitution granted him the power to do what he did given the times. Books have been written examining this aspect of his time in office that will do a far better job that I will here. You could give him a 3 here because of the true lack of civil rights that many people had during the war, you could give him a 2 for stating that he would allow slavery if kept the union, export all slaves out of the country if it would save the Union, enforce certain pro-slavery laws if it would save the Union, and so on. You could give him a 3 for ignoring Roger Taney and his Supreme Court. But you could also give him a 10 for the Emancipation Proclamation. You could give him a 9 for the reconstruction plans he had which would have been peaceful to the south and not draconian leading to 100 years of racial strife in this nation.
You can also give him 10 for his iron determination to save the Union above any other policy or thought. If a nation run by the people couldn’t survive, what does that say about nations run by people? This was the question he asked of us at Gettysburg. This is the question that overrides the entirety of his administration. If the Civil War resulted in America being broken in half or worse, what does that say about government of the people, by the people and for the people. Some would and have argued that it would mean nothing more than people can choose their own destiny. But Lincoln believed that there was something more there, and in fighting the war and winning the war on the terms he ultimately defined, he made is clear for this country that the ultimate Justice as defined by the Constitution is the longevity and growth of the Constitution itself, and the nation that it governs.
I’m going to give him an 8 here. I would personally give him a 10 but he gets some hits. All of them war measures. But we are going to hit a few more guys for their war measures and consistency is important in the raw scores as much as possible.
Context
[SIZE=11pt]Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt]Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=11pt] But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.[/SIZE]
Conclusion
Abraham Lincoln was the great man we needed for the Civil War. He was everything that Buchanan and Pierce were not. He was everything that Johnson was not. He was everything we want in a President at a time of significant crisis. He was 1865’s George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. He could lead, he could write/speak, and he could create policy. Like FDR he had a resolve that governed everything else. And he was willing to accept mistake or error, learn from it, and grow from it – a personality trait that far too few politicians have. On persuasion he gets a 10, on crisis he gets a 10, economy 9, foreign policy 10, Congress 10, civil rights 8 and context 10. 67 total points.
The initial raw ranking puts him ahead of George Washington and many people do. Which is odd when you think about it because as we said in the beginning, the measure of every President is based in language that Washington created. Washington faced a crisis – creating a nation. Lincoln’s crisis was saving that nation. Washington tried to stand against politics and lead where he thought was right. Lincoln tried to stand against the times and what seemed like futility and adhere to the nation that Washington birthed. In many respects, putting Lincoln over Washington is wrong. Like saying that Moses is a more important Christian than Christ. Except it’s not. What Lincoln did is finish what Washington started. The slavery question was always a problem. Our first generation of leaders couldn’t figure out how to solve it. The next generation made it worse, and the entire problem fell into Lincoln’s lap. This uneducated, Kentucky born lawyer hick whose only physical attribute was his height had an awful speaking voice, ugly face, robotic mannerisms, ill fitting clothes and poor beginnings rose above everything and led this country in its darkest time. He would never be elected today. He wouldn’t have been elected in Jefferson’s time either.
But in his time, in that most important moment in our history where everything could have been lost, he was elected. And he lead. And he won. And our nation exists because of him. All its warts, all its failures, all its ugly foreign policy, all of its mistakes and errors in judgment, all of its inventions, all of its beauty, all of its goodness, all of its greatness and all of its existence today is here because Lincoln fought for it with a resolve that we just don’t get enough of in our leaders. And he ensured that a nation of the people with all of their prejudices and beliefs, could be governed by the people with all of their weakness and greatness in an effort to lead for the people and their eternal quest for freedom, liberty and justice. Thank god we had Abraham Lincoln.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
I MIGHT take issue that Gettysburg is the greatest political speech ever. It's certainly up there, but there is some stiff competition: MLK's "Dream" and a few by Churchill.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
I'd be happy to have that debate. I'm very convinced you would lose. But I have arrogance issues.
timschochet
Footballguy
You might be right. What's remarkable about Gettysburg is that it's so precise. Churchill tends to go on and on. King's speech is precise but it is longer than Gettysburg.
I would argue that Churchill's phrases at the end of his speeches, particularly "Finest Hour", can't be beat. He used the English language better than anyone not named Shakespeare.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Dear Madam,
I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massachusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle.
I feel how weak and fruitless must be any word of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save.
I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.
Yours, very sincerely and respectfully,
A. Lincoln
I don't know Tim. Succinct, precise, pithy, full of pathos and respect, speaking (writing) from the heart. The man had a gift. Now Churchill, he had the gift of sarcasm and comedic wit which Lincoln does not display, and King, well he was masterful, alliteration, sweeping vision, imagery, exhortation. I would not have the hubris to try to rank these men, better men all than I, for certain.
I have been shown in the files of the War Department a statement of the Adjutant General of Massachusetts that you are the mother of five sons who have died gloriously on the field of battle.
I feel how weak and fruitless must be any word of mine which should attempt to beguile you from the grief of a loss so overwhelming. But I cannot refrain from tendering you the consolation that may be found in the thanks of the Republic they died to save.
I pray that our Heavenly Father may assuage the anguish of your bereavement, and leave you only the cherished memory of the loved and lost, and the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom.
Yours, very sincerely and respectfully,
A. Lincoln
I don't know Tim. Succinct, precise, pithy, full of pathos and respect, speaking (writing) from the heart. The man had a gift. Now Churchill, he had the gift of sarcasm and comedic wit which Lincoln does not display, and King, well he was masterful, alliteration, sweeping vision, imagery, exhortation. I would not have the hubris to try to rank these men, better men all than I, for certain.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
89. Ray Kroc
The two most important requirements for major success are: first, being in the right place at the right time, and second, doing something about it.
Ray Kroc was well over 50 years old before he met both of his requirements as stated above. He was a traveling salesman for a mixer company that was losing money. When he noticed that a small restaurant in San Bernardino, CA, had ordered 8 of his mixers, he decided to check it out. That restaurant was called "The McDonald Brothers Hamburgers". Ray liked what he saw and offered to set up franchises around the country, which he did, getting out of the mixer business. The franchises were a success, and Kroc now came up with the astonishing idea that there should be a McDonalds in every city, and every small town, that it could become the most recognized restaurant in America. The McDonald brothers balked; they were pleased with the extra income but that was crazy talk. Kroc offered to buy the business out from under them, and a deal was reached for 2.7 million.
Kroc wasn't crazy. He perceived that the time was right, in the United States, for chain recognition of restaurants, and for "fast food". He also brilliantly realized that Americans were migrating more than ever before, and that what was needed was to give them the illusion of recognition- the idea that no matter where you were in the USA (or later on, around the world) you could find a McDonald's, go in and for a small amount of money get food you were familiar with that tasted exactly the same everywhere. Of course, everyone knows how this story ended up: McDonald's became larger than even Kroc envisaged, and he became wealthy beyond his wildest dreams, and ended up a MLB owner (the San Diego Padres.)
Ray Kroc started a revolution in America, and it can be argued that it was as important a revolution as any in the 20th century. As David Halberstam noted in The Fifties, McDonald's changed not only the eating habits of Americans but also driving habits, shopping habits, essentially all aspects of the American way of life. There are of course, both sociologists and health experts who argue that these changes are not positive. The film Supersize Me demonstrates just how unhealthy fast food can be (as if we didn't already know) and the glut of fast food drive through restaurants in every town in America, led by the "Golden Arches" is not such a pretty site. But there is no doubt that Ray Kroc's dream has certainly become the reality for all of us.
Next up: he led his people out of civilization into the wilderness...
The two most important requirements for major success are: first, being in the right place at the right time, and second, doing something about it.
Ray Kroc was well over 50 years old before he met both of his requirements as stated above. He was a traveling salesman for a mixer company that was losing money. When he noticed that a small restaurant in San Bernardino, CA, had ordered 8 of his mixers, he decided to check it out. That restaurant was called "The McDonald Brothers Hamburgers". Ray liked what he saw and offered to set up franchises around the country, which he did, getting out of the mixer business. The franchises were a success, and Kroc now came up with the astonishing idea that there should be a McDonalds in every city, and every small town, that it could become the most recognized restaurant in America. The McDonald brothers balked; they were pleased with the extra income but that was crazy talk. Kroc offered to buy the business out from under them, and a deal was reached for 2.7 million.
Kroc wasn't crazy. He perceived that the time was right, in the United States, for chain recognition of restaurants, and for "fast food". He also brilliantly realized that Americans were migrating more than ever before, and that what was needed was to give them the illusion of recognition- the idea that no matter where you were in the USA (or later on, around the world) you could find a McDonald's, go in and for a small amount of money get food you were familiar with that tasted exactly the same everywhere. Of course, everyone knows how this story ended up: McDonald's became larger than even Kroc envisaged, and he became wealthy beyond his wildest dreams, and ended up a MLB owner (the San Diego Padres.)
Ray Kroc started a revolution in America, and it can be argued that it was as important a revolution as any in the 20th century. As David Halberstam noted in The Fifties, McDonald's changed not only the eating habits of Americans but also driving habits, shopping habits, essentially all aspects of the American way of life. There are of course, both sociologists and health experts who argue that these changes are not positive. The film Supersize Me demonstrates just how unhealthy fast food can be (as if we didn't already know) and the glut of fast food drive through restaurants in every town in America, led by the "Golden Arches" is not such a pretty site. But there is no doubt that Ray Kroc's dream has certainly become the reality for all of us.
Next up: he led his people out of civilization into the wilderness...
timschochet
Footballguy
Lincoln had great wit as well. Neither used much wit in their great speeches, mostly because the subjects were so grave. King, partly because he was a preacher, was probably a better deliverer of speeches than either man (certainly than Churchill IMO, but I can't speak to Lincoln obviously).
According to many historians, the greatest speechmaker in American history, in terms of delivery, was William Jennings Bryan. Unfortunately we really don't have much to go on other than their word.
I am not convinced that Tim views being succinct and precise as positive attributes.
timschochet
Footballguy
. It's at least open to question. Lincoln was as indispensable to the United States in 1861 as Winston Churchill was to England in 1940.
timschochet
Footballguy
Gawain
Footballguy
Supersize me can't be duplicated. The whole movie has been written off as a sham by most folks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ccdfzq2M1Ec
Yankee-Masterful write up of Lincoln. Moving.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Seward is an interesting cat. I would say that Chase or Bates wouldn't have been able to stand up to the pressure, but Seward could have. The other interesting one is Stanton. That guy was a bulldog. Once he got a hold of something he never let it go.
timschochet
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
88. Brigham Young
We should never permit ourselves to do anything that we are not willing to see our children do.
It's a bit ironic that in this nation that has always, from it's beginnings, been devoted to the concept of religious freedom, that one of the most prominent men in it's history chose to leave the United States (as it existed in 1847) because he believed his religion was being persecuted, in order to establish a new colony in the west. It's perhaps even more ironic that, having established his colony, he became it's governor in the name of the same nation he was fleeing from. Yet such is the remarkable story of Brigham Young: pioneer, prophet, statesman, and community organizer.
Upon the death of the founder of the Church of Latter Day Saints (no worries, we'll get to him later) Brigham Young took over the movement and decided that Nauvoo, Pennsylvania, just wasn't west enough for the community to practice it's ways without hostility from the "gentiles" (in this case, non-Mormons.) So Young took 70,000 pioneers on a remarkable journey- in many ways analogous to the Great Trek of the Boers in South Africa- undergoing extreme hardships along the way, and finally settling along the shores of the Great Salt Lake. There, he established a society from scratch which was incredibly well organized as compared to other western settlers. Schools, roads, homes, hospitals, were quickly built. The anarchy that defined so much of the "wild west" never surfaced here. Brigham Young was by all rights a dictator, though certainly a popular one. His rule was absolute.
After a few unfortunate acts of hostility, the United States government wisely chose not take over this rather hostile entity within it's territories, but simply to absorb it. So the Mormon government and way of life stayed intact, and became part of America. Brigham Young became governor of the Utah territory. He also established a university, Deseret, (later known as the University of Utah.) Young prospered and lived to be 76.
And he had many children and grandchildren. You would too, if you had 55 wives. Young believed in polygamy, and preached it. Only 16 of his wives produced children; but this was still enough to give him 46. By 1902, there were said to be 1,000 descendants of Brigham Young. (Quarterback Steve Young is a direct descendant.) The modern day Mormon church has, of course, denounced the act of polygamy, though certain more fundamentalist Mormons still practice it (as every fan of the HBO series Big Love is aware of.)
Brigham Young was also a racist who preached that blacks were inferior to whites and forbid blacks from entering the Church. Unfortunately for the modern day Mormon church, this particular teaching remained with them much longer than polygamy; it was only reversed in the late 1970s when the Mormon leaders were provided a revelation by God. Why God waited over 100 years to offer this revelation remains a mystery. Mitt Romney in his 2012 campaign was forced to explain why it took so long.
Next up: Probaby the most important legal mind in American history...
We should never permit ourselves to do anything that we are not willing to see our children do.
It's a bit ironic that in this nation that has always, from it's beginnings, been devoted to the concept of religious freedom, that one of the most prominent men in it's history chose to leave the United States (as it existed in 1847) because he believed his religion was being persecuted, in order to establish a new colony in the west. It's perhaps even more ironic that, having established his colony, he became it's governor in the name of the same nation he was fleeing from. Yet such is the remarkable story of Brigham Young: pioneer, prophet, statesman, and community organizer.
Upon the death of the founder of the Church of Latter Day Saints (no worries, we'll get to him later) Brigham Young took over the movement and decided that Nauvoo, Pennsylvania, just wasn't west enough for the community to practice it's ways without hostility from the "gentiles" (in this case, non-Mormons.) So Young took 70,000 pioneers on a remarkable journey- in many ways analogous to the Great Trek of the Boers in South Africa- undergoing extreme hardships along the way, and finally settling along the shores of the Great Salt Lake. There, he established a society from scratch which was incredibly well organized as compared to other western settlers. Schools, roads, homes, hospitals, were quickly built. The anarchy that defined so much of the "wild west" never surfaced here. Brigham Young was by all rights a dictator, though certainly a popular one. His rule was absolute.
After a few unfortunate acts of hostility, the United States government wisely chose not take over this rather hostile entity within it's territories, but simply to absorb it. So the Mormon government and way of life stayed intact, and became part of America. Brigham Young became governor of the Utah territory. He also established a university, Deseret, (later known as the University of Utah.) Young prospered and lived to be 76.
And he had many children and grandchildren. You would too, if you had 55 wives. Young believed in polygamy, and preached it. Only 16 of his wives produced children; but this was still enough to give him 46. By 1902, there were said to be 1,000 descendants of Brigham Young. (Quarterback Steve Young is a direct descendant.) The modern day Mormon church has, of course, denounced the act of polygamy, though certain more fundamentalist Mormons still practice it (as every fan of the HBO series Big Love is aware of.)
Brigham Young was also a racist who preached that blacks were inferior to whites and forbid blacks from entering the Church. Unfortunately for the modern day Mormon church, this particular teaching remained with them much longer than polygamy; it was only reversed in the late 1970s when the Mormon leaders were provided a revelation by God. Why God waited over 100 years to offer this revelation remains a mystery. Mitt Romney in his 2012 campaign was forced to explain why it took so long.
Next up: Probaby the most important legal mind in American history...
Last edited by a moderator:
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Andrew Johnson (1865-1869)
Public Acumen/Persuasion
If Johnson was half the man Lincoln was there is a chance that he could have had an effective time in office. But he wasn’t close. Johnson seemed to believe that when he talked to anyone he should remain supportive of whatever they were talking about, and then do whatever he wanted after the fact. This angered just about everyone. Bills that were thought to have his support were vetoed, he completely miscalculated the effects of the civil war on the country and how the north would deal with reconstruction, and he ultimately alienated his party, the other party, the whole of Congress, most of the states and just about everyone in between. The depths of his failures here are so massive that it would take too long to get through, but let’s just say that giving him a 1 here is being nice.
The guy even tried to talk directly to the people when he wanted to run for re-election and just about every speech backfired considerably.
War & Crisis
Johnson’s main crisis upon taking office after the death of Abraham Lincoln was reconstruction. With Congress out of session until the end of the year, the initial 6 months of rebuilding the country were his sole responsibility. Johnson set out to reform the state governments by appointing governors to write new constitutions that demanded the south to basically come back on bended knee. His plans were going to be much harsher than Lincoln’s. Except for some reason that is hard to explain in history, he backed down almost immediately on many of his threats and began pardoning a ton of people, including leaders of the south. At the same time while he demanded the new state constitutions to be anti-slavery almost all of them had ‘black codes’ that were a small step above slavery and Johnson just kept working with them.
When Congress came back into session they attacked almost every aspect of his plan. Radical republicans wanted the south punished. Moderates tried to find some common ground to make it all work, and Johnson believed that the black question was more left to the states and got in the way of any progress. Johnson tried to block voting rights for blacks until his last days in office and it resulted in his facing impeachment.
When the impeachment crisis started it looked fairly clear that Johnson was going to be removed from office. But he eventually made a deal with congressional republicans to stay away from fighting them on reconstruction if they didn’t vote to convict. In that deal, Johnson hamstrung future presidents as Congress acted with more formal power than they had in the face of the executive – something that was feared to have happened with Harrison died 40 years earlier.
Economy
He so mishandled reconstruction that he had no economic policy to speak of. Congress eventually began running the country and he was a figurehead at best. Was the economy better when he left? Not really. It’s about the nicest thing you can say about Johnson.
Foreign Policy
Giving Johnson credit for any foreign policy acts while he was in office is an affront to William Seward. Facing massive problems at home and an inability to do anything with it, Seward was basically our Prime Minister. He negotiated with Russia, got Johnson to send troops to Mexico to stop fighting there with France, and made peace with England over civil war claims. Johnson didn’t have the ability to do any of this without Seward, had no true set policy and left the foreign affairs of his time to a better man. If he handled foreign affairs the way he handled his own country, we would have been invaded by every country under the sun.
Executive Skills/Congress
He had one shining moment in his first week when the cabinet supported him. Then all hell broke loose. He fought with congress, he fired Stanton, he went to war with republicans, supported democrats, thought he was better than all of them, and made enemies in every single corridor of power in the country. The result was the impeachment movement that almost removed him from power. Good rule of thumb for all Presidents – look at how Johnson handled congress and then do the opposite. You are pretty much guaranteed a 7 or more in this category.
Justice/Rights
Johnson was an unapologetic racist. He allowed black codes throughout the south, regarded the slavery question as a waste of time, vetoed the Freedman’s Bureau, fought the amendments to the Constitution that were making their way through the country, and did everything in his power to stop blacks from having equal footing – or any footing – in the country after the war.
Context
It would have been hard for anyone to follow Lincoln. Though he won the war, the smoke was still rising from the battles. It required a political skill to work within the rebuilding of the nation that few had. Lincoln would have managed it. Johnson couldn’t. His personal failures were immense, his political failures were worse. Congress basically stripped executive power from the President just 3 years after our greatest President rules so well simply because Johnson was so bad. And his failures led to an awful 30 years of reconstruction that result in the racism problems this country has even today. The black codes that he ignored and allowed to fester turned the south into an anti-black zone for decades. In every measure, Andrew Johnson was an awful President.
Conclusion
Lincoln’s corpse could have been a better President, Weekend at Bernie’s style. At least then, Seward and Stanton could have run the country for a few years. On persuasion he gets a 1, on crisis a 1, economy 1, foreign policy 2, congress 1, civil rights 1, context 1. 8 total points. And only because the lowest is 7. We are still feeling the effects of the great failure of Andrew Johnson in this country. Future Presidents had a helluva time trying to fix everything. And unlike Buchanan and Pierce, there is nothing you can point to, however small, and say that at least Johnson did that right. He did nothing right.
Public Acumen/Persuasion
If Johnson was half the man Lincoln was there is a chance that he could have had an effective time in office. But he wasn’t close. Johnson seemed to believe that when he talked to anyone he should remain supportive of whatever they were talking about, and then do whatever he wanted after the fact. This angered just about everyone. Bills that were thought to have his support were vetoed, he completely miscalculated the effects of the civil war on the country and how the north would deal with reconstruction, and he ultimately alienated his party, the other party, the whole of Congress, most of the states and just about everyone in between. The depths of his failures here are so massive that it would take too long to get through, but let’s just say that giving him a 1 here is being nice.
The guy even tried to talk directly to the people when he wanted to run for re-election and just about every speech backfired considerably.
War & Crisis
Johnson’s main crisis upon taking office after the death of Abraham Lincoln was reconstruction. With Congress out of session until the end of the year, the initial 6 months of rebuilding the country were his sole responsibility. Johnson set out to reform the state governments by appointing governors to write new constitutions that demanded the south to basically come back on bended knee. His plans were going to be much harsher than Lincoln’s. Except for some reason that is hard to explain in history, he backed down almost immediately on many of his threats and began pardoning a ton of people, including leaders of the south. At the same time while he demanded the new state constitutions to be anti-slavery almost all of them had ‘black codes’ that were a small step above slavery and Johnson just kept working with them.
When Congress came back into session they attacked almost every aspect of his plan. Radical republicans wanted the south punished. Moderates tried to find some common ground to make it all work, and Johnson believed that the black question was more left to the states and got in the way of any progress. Johnson tried to block voting rights for blacks until his last days in office and it resulted in his facing impeachment.
When the impeachment crisis started it looked fairly clear that Johnson was going to be removed from office. But he eventually made a deal with congressional republicans to stay away from fighting them on reconstruction if they didn’t vote to convict. In that deal, Johnson hamstrung future presidents as Congress acted with more formal power than they had in the face of the executive – something that was feared to have happened with Harrison died 40 years earlier.
Economy
He so mishandled reconstruction that he had no economic policy to speak of. Congress eventually began running the country and he was a figurehead at best. Was the economy better when he left? Not really. It’s about the nicest thing you can say about Johnson.
Foreign Policy
Giving Johnson credit for any foreign policy acts while he was in office is an affront to William Seward. Facing massive problems at home and an inability to do anything with it, Seward was basically our Prime Minister. He negotiated with Russia, got Johnson to send troops to Mexico to stop fighting there with France, and made peace with England over civil war claims. Johnson didn’t have the ability to do any of this without Seward, had no true set policy and left the foreign affairs of his time to a better man. If he handled foreign affairs the way he handled his own country, we would have been invaded by every country under the sun.
Executive Skills/Congress
He had one shining moment in his first week when the cabinet supported him. Then all hell broke loose. He fought with congress, he fired Stanton, he went to war with republicans, supported democrats, thought he was better than all of them, and made enemies in every single corridor of power in the country. The result was the impeachment movement that almost removed him from power. Good rule of thumb for all Presidents – look at how Johnson handled congress and then do the opposite. You are pretty much guaranteed a 7 or more in this category.
Justice/Rights
Johnson was an unapologetic racist. He allowed black codes throughout the south, regarded the slavery question as a waste of time, vetoed the Freedman’s Bureau, fought the amendments to the Constitution that were making their way through the country, and did everything in his power to stop blacks from having equal footing – or any footing – in the country after the war.
Context
It would have been hard for anyone to follow Lincoln. Though he won the war, the smoke was still rising from the battles. It required a political skill to work within the rebuilding of the nation that few had. Lincoln would have managed it. Johnson couldn’t. His personal failures were immense, his political failures were worse. Congress basically stripped executive power from the President just 3 years after our greatest President rules so well simply because Johnson was so bad. And his failures led to an awful 30 years of reconstruction that result in the racism problems this country has even today. The black codes that he ignored and allowed to fester turned the south into an anti-black zone for decades. In every measure, Andrew Johnson was an awful President.
Conclusion
Lincoln’s corpse could have been a better President, Weekend at Bernie’s style. At least then, Seward and Stanton could have run the country for a few years. On persuasion he gets a 1, on crisis a 1, economy 1, foreign policy 2, congress 1, civil rights 1, context 1. 8 total points. And only because the lowest is 7. We are still feeling the effects of the great failure of Andrew Johnson in this country. Future Presidents had a helluva time trying to fix everything. And unlike Buchanan and Pierce, there is nothing you can point to, however small, and say that at least Johnson did that right. He did nothing right.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
As we approach 1870, we are coming to the end of the second 50 years - the era of the Civil War. Our founders used the first 50 years to form a country, and their sons and followers in the next 50 almost destroyed it. If not for the leadership of Abraham Lincoln at the most crucial time, history is a very different story. From 1820 to 1870 good men and bad leaders were given the power to move this country from its founding to something more. Most of them failed. Three of them died. Three of them are our worst Presidents. But the country endured, and by the time that Ulysses Grant took over in the White House, it was yet again a new country, bloodied by its own sins, needing to grow up again and move forward. There were still some rocky times and less than stellar leaders to come, but by 1920 and the end of World War I, The United States looked like it was poised to do something great.
So far the raw rankings stand at:
Lincoln 67
Washington 64
Monroe 59
Polk 55
Jefferson 50
Adams 49
Jackson 44
Madison 39
Van Buren 29
Tyler 29
Q. Adams 27
Taylor 19
Fillmore 18
WH Harrison 12
Buchanan 11
Pierce 10
A. Johnson 8
In the next grouping we have 10 men who collectively didn't exactly set the world on fire (in the good way - we will get to the guys that did) but we do have 1 legend, 2 solid contributors, and a host of mediocrity that saw the turn of the century as an interesting time for this nation. By the time we got to World War I, the United States was becoming the power that George Washington envisioned in his Farewell Address almost the very date he said it would happen. That guy is continuously amazing.
So far the raw rankings stand at:
Lincoln 67
Washington 64
Monroe 59
Polk 55
Jefferson 50
Adams 49
Jackson 44
Madison 39
Van Buren 29
Tyler 29
Q. Adams 27
Taylor 19
Fillmore 18
WH Harrison 12
Buchanan 11
Pierce 10
A. Johnson 8
In the next grouping we have 10 men who collectively didn't exactly set the world on fire (in the good way - we will get to the guys that did) but we do have 1 legend, 2 solid contributors, and a host of mediocrity that saw the turn of the century as an interesting time for this nation. By the time we got to World War I, the United States was becoming the power that George Washington envisioned in his Farewell Address almost the very date he said it would happen. That guy is continuously amazing.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
You could. Hamlin was an awful VP that Lincoln didn't choose - the party did. So when Lincoln was setting his sights on reconstruction and not war in 1865 he wanted someone that could help with the south. A southern democrat who remained loyal to the Union during the war would be perfect. Johnson fit that bill. He wasn't chosen because Lincoln knew Johnson would become President. He was chosen for his loyalty during the war and Lincoln was trying to run above the sectional differences. They didn't even technically run as Republicans in 1865.
But yeah, it turned out to be a mistake.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I'm guessing it is going to be someone other than me. Still, hope springs eternal.timschochet said:
You can easily set this to rights by giving Lincoln a more balanced score for Rights. Recognizing that he contributed significantly here, but also had some severe failings...perhaps a 5 is in order? That puts him more comfortably in a tie for Washington.
You gave Washington only a 5 here despite the rather significant factor that, had Washington not been the statesman and great human being that he was, we might never have had a Union to save by the time Lincoln comes on the scene.
Still finding your rankings quite educational. I should post a new ADP list later tonight.
Had a long conversation about this question a few years back, albeit limited to American speeches (which takes Churchill out of the running).
Eventually the simple fact that Gettysburg is THE one speech that every American school child memorizes, the one that is quoted at Shakespearean "cliché" levels throughout the rest of human history, almost has to elevate it to #1.
The Dream speech is compelling, and significant...certainly top 3. But really the "content of their character rather than the color of their skin" is the one memorable aspect that the "man on the street" could identify.
Gettysburg not only gave us the much-parodied "four score and seven years," but "nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal," "we cannot dedicate - we cannot consecrate - we cannot hallow this ground," "last full measure of devotion," "this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom," and of course "government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from this earth." I suggest that the man on the street could place at least 4/6 of those as Lincoln's.
I'm even prepared to argue that Lincoln's 2nd inaugural belongs in the top 3, if not the #2 position. Lincoln may or may not have been a great speechmaker, but as a speechwriter, he was without equal in this country.
timschochet
Footballguy
87. John Marshall
When a law is in its nature a contract, when absolute rights have vested under that contract, a repeal of the law cannot divest those rights.
In some ways, John Marshall was a contradiction: a Virginian born slaveowner, he was America's leading Federalist during his lifetime. Marshall rejected the Jeffersonian idea that the states' rights were paramount, instead pushing for the supremacy of federal law over state law.
John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for 34 years, from 1801 to 1835, during the formative years of this country. He was instrumental in the development of the Court as a branch of government co-equal to the executive and Congress. And he was vital to the establishment of the rule of law. Any one of those achievements would make him worthy to be placed on this list. That he was so important to everything I have mentioned makes his placement inevitable.
Besides some of the most important decisions in SC history (including Marbury vs. Madison), Marshall also was the judge for the Aaron Burr trial. Against the wishes of Thomas Jefferson, Marshall narrowly limited the definition of the word "treason" and therefore instructed the jury to acquit Burr. This didn't make Jefferson very happy. He was not the last President to be angered by the Chief Justice; years later Andrew Jackson was outraged when Marshall seemed to favor the rights of native Americans against the government's policies.
Jefferson also opposed Marbury, complaining that allowing the Constitution to mean whatever the Court says it means would make the Constitution "a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please." Modern day conservatives would likely agree with this sentiment, (thanks mostly to another Chief Justice who will appear later on this list.) But it was Marshall who first enumerated the principle of judicial review.
Next up: He had the ability to do anything he wanted, except secure his own happiness...
When a law is in its nature a contract, when absolute rights have vested under that contract, a repeal of the law cannot divest those rights.
In some ways, John Marshall was a contradiction: a Virginian born slaveowner, he was America's leading Federalist during his lifetime. Marshall rejected the Jeffersonian idea that the states' rights were paramount, instead pushing for the supremacy of federal law over state law.
John Marshall was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for 34 years, from 1801 to 1835, during the formative years of this country. He was instrumental in the development of the Court as a branch of government co-equal to the executive and Congress. And he was vital to the establishment of the rule of law. Any one of those achievements would make him worthy to be placed on this list. That he was so important to everything I have mentioned makes his placement inevitable.
Besides some of the most important decisions in SC history (including Marbury vs. Madison), Marshall also was the judge for the Aaron Burr trial. Against the wishes of Thomas Jefferson, Marshall narrowly limited the definition of the word "treason" and therefore instructed the jury to acquit Burr. This didn't make Jefferson very happy. He was not the last President to be angered by the Chief Justice; years later Andrew Jackson was outraged when Marshall seemed to favor the rights of native Americans against the government's policies.
Jefferson also opposed Marbury, complaining that allowing the Constitution to mean whatever the Court says it means would make the Constitution "a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please." Modern day conservatives would likely agree with this sentiment, (thanks mostly to another Chief Justice who will appear later on this list.) But it was Marshall who first enumerated the principle of judicial review.
Next up: He had the ability to do anything he wanted, except secure his own happiness...
dparker713
Footballguy
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877)
Public Acumen/Persuasion
Grant is a very interesting case study on how history treats presidents. During his time in office he was very popular. After office, he was just as popular. Once he went into private business he was bankrupted by his son and his family name took a hit. Decades after his death his administration was considered the most corrupt in American history, yet none of the corruption was his. By the middle of the 20th century he was considered a poor general who got lucky and a poor president who was too loyal in the face of corruption. And lately he is once again viewed well by history. The roller coaster of President Grant.
Grant’s time in office had to deal with reconstruction, black civil rights, Indian policy, changes to the economy, an economic depression, westward expansion at a lightning rate and renewed issues with England over the usual fighting. All in all, though, Grant gets a solid grade here. He was popular enough that upon the end of his second term there were movements to get him on the ballot for a third term, something unheard of at the time. And he narrowly failed to make it to nomination after several ballots at the convention. The corruption during his time was partly his fault simply because of his loyalty to people that were loyal to him but it is true that none of the corruption was his.
War & Crisis
Reconstruction. Grant wanted to follow Lincoln’s plan of reconciliation, not military dictatorship that radical republicans wanted. He also wanted his party to start making headway in the south to counter the extreme racism there. Signing off on various laws that he advocated, he was forced to declare martial law in South Carolina to stop the terrorism of whites against blacks. But he didn’t always do that. When similar problems occurred in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi Grant didn’t send troops in. He was very concerned with using the military every step of the way and looking like a military commander and not a President. Because of that timidity the south never got on board with his reconstructions plans and civil rights for blacks. And with the ongoing fighting about it taking it toll on the north, the will to keep fighting with the south was declining.
The worst corruption scandal of his time included a run on government gold by speculators that tried to corner the market. When Grant and his treasury team found out about it Grant flooded the market with federal gold to get it away from the speculators. It resulted in the price of gold plummeting and speculators and investors lost a fortune, creating the Panic of 1873. In the aftermath of the depression that it caused (European markets having the same problem assisting the depression) Grant was advised by many to flood the market with paper money to help. He initially was going to support the plan but changed his mind believing that the federal government should not play games with the money policy like that. The result was a bill that once again based the federal economy on gold and removing paper money from circulation. The end result of how Grant handled this economic crisis was that the Republican party became a party of fiscal restraint for the rest of the century, the federal government kept a hard currency policy for decades and the economy came back.
Grant also had to deal with growing tensions once again with London over civil war debts, the Canadian border issues that plagued the 19th century and things like fishing rights in the atlantic waters. Not wanting to start yet another war coming off of the civil war and with the economy teetering, Grant advocated that representatives from Canada, England and America meet to iron out a deal once and for all on all of their issues. In what became known as the Treaty of Washington, Grant settled all claims with these countries in America’s favor and also managed to finally end all hostilities with England and Canada. That treaty is one of the best we’ve ever entered.
Economy
As discussed in an effort to stop a run on federal gold he flooded the market and caused a Panic that led to a depression. But his policies in answer to this problem saved the economy. Money policy was a big deal under Grant and is far too technical to get into here. From removing silver from the basis of the economy, to restricting paper money to fighting with Congress on inflation policy, Grant’s administration stood for a solid gold backed economy that wasn’t too big for its own good and that stopped speculation on the backs of the average voter, mainly farmers and small businesses. His plan was ultimately successful, but it was painful getting there.
Foreign Policy
He finally ended all hostilities with England. He continued America’s drive for Caribbean states like Cuba and others but like all previous Presidents was unable to get any of that land. The Treaty of Washington was a huge foreign policy success. He gets solid grades here.
Executive Skills/Congress
Grant’s main adversary in Congress was the far right of his own party. His executive skills in being the CEO of the country were bad in terms of the people he allowed to work for him and their seemingly unending corruption so he gets a big hit here. But usually when Grant championed something Congress worked with him. But his party did split a little in his second election and even though he won, his party did weaken itself slightly in the aftermath. The true end result of that was that reconstruction never managed to get a solid footing the way Lincoln envisioned and the south used every legal maneuver possible to make it as hard as possible for blacks to have equal rights.
Justice/Rights
Grant rewrote American policy regarding Indians. He wanted them to achieve citizenship and be treated as equals. He had laws passed to assist this as much as possible, but by the time he was in office the reservations that they occupied didn’t have fertile ground enough to support their culture. His intentions were good but the results were average at best.
Grant advocated and got passed laws to attack the KKK and stop the terrorism of blacks who tried to exercise their rights. In response he championed the passage of the 15th Amendment to settle the matter constitutionally once and for all. He considered it his greatest achievement as President. But with reconstruction and deep rooted racism in the south he never saw true equality in the nation.
Context
Grant was President at the 100 year birthday of our nation. Coming off of a civil war and the abject failure of the previous administration Grant’s primary focus was to keep the country growing, rebuild the south and deal with the domestic issues surrounding race. With Congress asserting more power in the wake of Andrew Johnson a strong willed President was necessary and Grant fit that bill. But his personal failures and loyalty to a fault hurt him in many respects and his good intentions with reconstruction and civil rights were band-aides at best. Though he tried, the scars of the civil war were just too much to overcome so shortly after the final shots.
Conclusion
Grant continues to be an interesting President. A failure in some respects, a success in others, a man with personal failures that hurt his administration yet his personal public opinion was always very high – the dopamine of the general that won the war was still filtering through the nation. On persuasion he gets a 5 on crisis he gets a 5 on economy he gets a 6 on foreign affairs he gets a 8, on congress he gets a 7, on civil rights he gets a 7, on context he gets a 6. 44 total points. Grant was a solid President but he could have and should have been better. He wasn’t able to use his great public perception to guide the country the way it needed to go regarding reconstruction or civil rights, but he managed the economy well in the face of the corruption that his loyalty blinded him to in many respects. But one thing that Grant never gets credit for is that in the end when he finally saw the corruption of his friends he actually did try to do something – he fought for the first civil service system. Congress refused to make it a permanent policy but Grant started the fight that finally got that system in place. He tried, in the end, to right the wrongs. He just tried too late.
Public Acumen/Persuasion
Grant is a very interesting case study on how history treats presidents. During his time in office he was very popular. After office, he was just as popular. Once he went into private business he was bankrupted by his son and his family name took a hit. Decades after his death his administration was considered the most corrupt in American history, yet none of the corruption was his. By the middle of the 20th century he was considered a poor general who got lucky and a poor president who was too loyal in the face of corruption. And lately he is once again viewed well by history. The roller coaster of President Grant.
Grant’s time in office had to deal with reconstruction, black civil rights, Indian policy, changes to the economy, an economic depression, westward expansion at a lightning rate and renewed issues with England over the usual fighting. All in all, though, Grant gets a solid grade here. He was popular enough that upon the end of his second term there were movements to get him on the ballot for a third term, something unheard of at the time. And he narrowly failed to make it to nomination after several ballots at the convention. The corruption during his time was partly his fault simply because of his loyalty to people that were loyal to him but it is true that none of the corruption was his.
War & Crisis
Reconstruction. Grant wanted to follow Lincoln’s plan of reconciliation, not military dictatorship that radical republicans wanted. He also wanted his party to start making headway in the south to counter the extreme racism there. Signing off on various laws that he advocated, he was forced to declare martial law in South Carolina to stop the terrorism of whites against blacks. But he didn’t always do that. When similar problems occurred in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi Grant didn’t send troops in. He was very concerned with using the military every step of the way and looking like a military commander and not a President. Because of that timidity the south never got on board with his reconstructions plans and civil rights for blacks. And with the ongoing fighting about it taking it toll on the north, the will to keep fighting with the south was declining.
The worst corruption scandal of his time included a run on government gold by speculators that tried to corner the market. When Grant and his treasury team found out about it Grant flooded the market with federal gold to get it away from the speculators. It resulted in the price of gold plummeting and speculators and investors lost a fortune, creating the Panic of 1873. In the aftermath of the depression that it caused (European markets having the same problem assisting the depression) Grant was advised by many to flood the market with paper money to help. He initially was going to support the plan but changed his mind believing that the federal government should not play games with the money policy like that. The result was a bill that once again based the federal economy on gold and removing paper money from circulation. The end result of how Grant handled this economic crisis was that the Republican party became a party of fiscal restraint for the rest of the century, the federal government kept a hard currency policy for decades and the economy came back.
Grant also had to deal with growing tensions once again with London over civil war debts, the Canadian border issues that plagued the 19th century and things like fishing rights in the atlantic waters. Not wanting to start yet another war coming off of the civil war and with the economy teetering, Grant advocated that representatives from Canada, England and America meet to iron out a deal once and for all on all of their issues. In what became known as the Treaty of Washington, Grant settled all claims with these countries in America’s favor and also managed to finally end all hostilities with England and Canada. That treaty is one of the best we’ve ever entered.
Economy
As discussed in an effort to stop a run on federal gold he flooded the market and caused a Panic that led to a depression. But his policies in answer to this problem saved the economy. Money policy was a big deal under Grant and is far too technical to get into here. From removing silver from the basis of the economy, to restricting paper money to fighting with Congress on inflation policy, Grant’s administration stood for a solid gold backed economy that wasn’t too big for its own good and that stopped speculation on the backs of the average voter, mainly farmers and small businesses. His plan was ultimately successful, but it was painful getting there.
Foreign Policy
He finally ended all hostilities with England. He continued America’s drive for Caribbean states like Cuba and others but like all previous Presidents was unable to get any of that land. The Treaty of Washington was a huge foreign policy success. He gets solid grades here.
Executive Skills/Congress
Grant’s main adversary in Congress was the far right of his own party. His executive skills in being the CEO of the country were bad in terms of the people he allowed to work for him and their seemingly unending corruption so he gets a big hit here. But usually when Grant championed something Congress worked with him. But his party did split a little in his second election and even though he won, his party did weaken itself slightly in the aftermath. The true end result of that was that reconstruction never managed to get a solid footing the way Lincoln envisioned and the south used every legal maneuver possible to make it as hard as possible for blacks to have equal rights.
Justice/Rights
Grant rewrote American policy regarding Indians. He wanted them to achieve citizenship and be treated as equals. He had laws passed to assist this as much as possible, but by the time he was in office the reservations that they occupied didn’t have fertile ground enough to support their culture. His intentions were good but the results were average at best.
Grant advocated and got passed laws to attack the KKK and stop the terrorism of blacks who tried to exercise their rights. In response he championed the passage of the 15th Amendment to settle the matter constitutionally once and for all. He considered it his greatest achievement as President. But with reconstruction and deep rooted racism in the south he never saw true equality in the nation.
Context
Grant was President at the 100 year birthday of our nation. Coming off of a civil war and the abject failure of the previous administration Grant’s primary focus was to keep the country growing, rebuild the south and deal with the domestic issues surrounding race. With Congress asserting more power in the wake of Andrew Johnson a strong willed President was necessary and Grant fit that bill. But his personal failures and loyalty to a fault hurt him in many respects and his good intentions with reconstruction and civil rights were band-aides at best. Though he tried, the scars of the civil war were just too much to overcome so shortly after the final shots.
Conclusion
Grant continues to be an interesting President. A failure in some respects, a success in others, a man with personal failures that hurt his administration yet his personal public opinion was always very high – the dopamine of the general that won the war was still filtering through the nation. On persuasion he gets a 5 on crisis he gets a 5 on economy he gets a 6 on foreign affairs he gets a 8, on congress he gets a 7, on civil rights he gets a 7, on context he gets a 6. 44 total points. Grant was a solid President but he could have and should have been better. He wasn’t able to use his great public perception to guide the country the way it needed to go regarding reconstruction or civil rights, but he managed the economy well in the face of the corruption that his loyalty blinded him to in many respects. But one thing that Grant never gets credit for is that in the end when he finally saw the corruption of his friends he actually did try to do something – he fought for the first civil service system. Congress refused to make it a permanent policy but Grant started the fight that finally got that system in place. He tried, in the end, to right the wrongs. He just tried too late.
timschochet
Footballguy
We'll have that argument later.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I knew I was a bit of a long shot for the honor, yet I still feel some disappointment. I can't see how I can fit into the list going forward unless, perhaps, there is a spot on your list for a quintessential waste of potential. I am a rather extraordinary cautionary tale.
timschochet
Footballguy
Anything's possible.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
100. Billie Jean King
99. John Brown
98. Joe McCathy
97. Eli Whitney
96. Huey Long
95. George Gershwin
94. Billy Graham
93. Madonna
92. John L. Lewis
91. Rachel Carson
90. Marilyn Monroe
89. Ray Kroc
88. Brigham Young
87. John Marshall
99. John Brown
98. Joe McCathy
97. Eli Whitney
96. Huey Long
95. George Gershwin
94. Billy Graham
93. Madonna
92. John L. Lewis
91. Rachel Carson
90. Marilyn Monroe
89. Ray Kroc
88. Brigham Young
87. John Marshall
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
John Marshall at 87 is interesting. I'm still trying to figure out how 100 and 99 make the list because I have no ability to come to that conclusion.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
So who killed the thread? Me (or Ulysses S. Grant) or tim (or John Marshall)?
This is a hard one.
This is a hard one.
TheAristocrat
Footballguy
Some of us are just reading the updates without commentary. I just like learning stuff from smart guys.
Other are waiting for the top 20 fruits update. I think YF23 and Tim should keep the updates coming. Some of it is quite interesting.
Other are waiting for the top 20 fruits update. I think YF23 and Tim should keep the updates coming. Some of it is quite interesting.
Don Quixote
Footballguy
Marshall's pre-Supreme Court days tend to get glossed over, but he was pretty critical in the early days of the republic even before that. He was one of the leading pro-ratification voices in Virginia. He was also one of the delegates to France during the XYZ Affair, and, while he was Secretary of State, negotiated the treaty that ended the Quasi War that followed, restoring the U.S. as a neutral.
I've mentioned some of Jean Edward Smith's Presidential bios in that thread; he's got a good one on Marshall too.
I've mentioned some of Jean Edward Smith's Presidential bios in that thread; he's got a good one on Marshall too.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
86. Howard Hughes
Every man has his price or a guy like me couldn't exist.
Filmmaker, aviator, aerospace engineer, billionaire tycoon, real estate magnate, defense manufacturer, electronics specialist, mass media genius, manufacturer, hotelier- have I left anything out? Oh yeah, serious social recluse for most of his life.
Hughes was the stuff of legends, generally thought to be, during his lifetime, the wealthiest man in the world- and by far one of the strangest. But there is no question about his brilliance or his belonging on this list. He was an innovator and a genius in everything he touched. His most famous exploits, of course, are connected to filmmaking and aircraft: in both cases he revolutionized the industry. There is a long list of planes that he personally designed. The most famous one remains the H-4 Hercules, better known as the "Spruce Goose". It used to be in Long Beach, so I got to see it. That is one big amazing plane. It's been moved to Oregon now.
My father in law spent his career working for a Las Vegas based home development company, and he told me many stories about Hughes' legendary acumen in land ownership. Long before Las Vegas became the metropolis it is now, Hughes basically owned most or all of the land, thousands of acres in the desert. He brilliantly sold it off piece by piece to developers as the price increased. According to my FIL and the people that worked with him, Hughes never made a bad deal. He had bought it all for peanuts when it was worth nothing, and sold it to hotels and developers at a premium. The Hughes company continues to sell off land there today.
But the other part that my FIL told me was that Hughes, true to his nature, was NEVER THERE. All of his transactions were conducted through his personal attorneys, who were said to be in contact with Hughes from an unknown location. He refused to speak on the phone to anyone- often these negotiations would take months since the attorneys at times could only contact him by letters to PO boxes. Whenever a signature was needed, in those days before faxes and computers, it would take a week to two weeks as Hughes was somewhere around the world, not to be seen.
As I hinted in my clue, Hughes could not translate his business success into a happy personal life. At a young age he publicly dated several movie stars, but became close to none of them. Later he fell in love and married an actress named Jean Peters, but he was obsessed with her to the extent that Hughes hired security officers who guarded her all day long and never allowed her to talk or meet with any friends. Men who approached her were warned away or physically threatened. This went on for about 14 years of marriage before they finally divorced. (She settled for a $70,000 annual income and no part of the Hughes estate.)
Next up: Our greatest trial lawyer
Every man has his price or a guy like me couldn't exist.
Filmmaker, aviator, aerospace engineer, billionaire tycoon, real estate magnate, defense manufacturer, electronics specialist, mass media genius, manufacturer, hotelier- have I left anything out? Oh yeah, serious social recluse for most of his life.
Hughes was the stuff of legends, generally thought to be, during his lifetime, the wealthiest man in the world- and by far one of the strangest. But there is no question about his brilliance or his belonging on this list. He was an innovator and a genius in everything he touched. His most famous exploits, of course, are connected to filmmaking and aircraft: in both cases he revolutionized the industry. There is a long list of planes that he personally designed. The most famous one remains the H-4 Hercules, better known as the "Spruce Goose". It used to be in Long Beach, so I got to see it. That is one big amazing plane. It's been moved to Oregon now.
My father in law spent his career working for a Las Vegas based home development company, and he told me many stories about Hughes' legendary acumen in land ownership. Long before Las Vegas became the metropolis it is now, Hughes basically owned most or all of the land, thousands of acres in the desert. He brilliantly sold it off piece by piece to developers as the price increased. According to my FIL and the people that worked with him, Hughes never made a bad deal. He had bought it all for peanuts when it was worth nothing, and sold it to hotels and developers at a premium. The Hughes company continues to sell off land there today.
But the other part that my FIL told me was that Hughes, true to his nature, was NEVER THERE. All of his transactions were conducted through his personal attorneys, who were said to be in contact with Hughes from an unknown location. He refused to speak on the phone to anyone- often these negotiations would take months since the attorneys at times could only contact him by letters to PO boxes. Whenever a signature was needed, in those days before faxes and computers, it would take a week to two weeks as Hughes was somewhere around the world, not to be seen.
As I hinted in my clue, Hughes could not translate his business success into a happy personal life. At a young age he publicly dated several movie stars, but became close to none of them. Later he fell in love and married an actress named Jean Peters, but he was obsessed with her to the extent that Hughes hired security officers who guarded her all day long and never allowed her to talk or meet with any friends. Men who approached her were warned away or physically threatened. This went on for about 14 years of marriage before they finally divorced. (She settled for a $70,000 annual income and no part of the Hughes estate.)
Next up: Our greatest trial lawyer
Last edited by a moderator:
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
It's gonna be me....... I'm ready. Make me look good.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Rutherford B. Hayes (1877-1881)
Public Acumen/Persuasion
He definitely gets a 10 for the beard. The best Presidential beard in American history.
Hayes assumed the office after Grant in the most disputed election in our history to the time. Bush Gore is the only one close since. Reports from all over the country were mixed with who between Hayes and the democrat Tilden won the election. Some states sent two different elector ballots to Washington and the entire thing was a mess. The Congress ultimately created a commission to handle the matter. It was supposed to be a commission whereby there would be an equal amount of republicans and democrats on it with one independent vote. The independent guy, though, was caught in a scandal and had to be removed, and the final seat fell to a republican. With an 8-7 advantage on the commission, the republicans certified the election for Hayes and he beat Tilden. Democrats never considered him a legitimate President and because of if, like John Quincy Adams decades prior, he was doomed to fail in office.
Hayes tried to change Washington though. He championed the cause that Grant picked up too late in civil service reform and fought his own party. When Congress wouldn’t work with him on it he issued executive orders end running them. But in the midterm elections Democrats won the House back and Hayes presidency was basically doomed.
War & Crisis
Hayes had to deal with reconstruction. He was a radical republican and wanted to protect voting rights in the south but he didn’t have the government support behind him and the ongoing struggles with using the military was proving unwinnable. In contrast to his words to the public Hayes began working on removing all federal troops from the south. He clung to the condition that he would only do it if the southern states respected the rights of blacks to vote. They promised and he removed the troops effectively ended reconstruction. And within a month of the troops leaving the southern states passed laws that effectively gutted the 15th amendment in practice.
The economy took a turn for the worse at the same time and Hayes had to deal with that while in office. He believed Grant was right to stick the country to the gold standard but he didn’t have the support in Congress to make that work right away. The economy was a mess for the first two years of his term, but in the middle of his term he got it fixed and the economy boomed by the end of his term.
The only other main crisis that Hayes faced was a canal in central America to connect the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. It’s covered more in foreign policy however.
Economy
Grant got it moving again before he left but then it sunk back after Hayes was elected. It took two years to fix it, and by sticking with the gold standard and making it clear what bills he would sign and what he wouldn’t, the economy bounced back in his final two years. It was roaring by the time he left office because he kept his word on what he would support and what he wouldn’t support and investors were able to project long term gains as a result building a confidence in the economy that the hadn’t had in years.
Foreign Policy
His was dominated by a canal question linking the Atlantic and the Pacific. With international talks in Paris over the topic it was proposed to build the canal through Panama. American engineers in Paris attacked the plan as impossible but the French mainly supported the Panama option to build the canal at sea level and the powers that be supported that plan instead of America’s. Hayes didn’t support the plan as it was basically a French plan and Hayes believed that it would be a repudiation of the Monroe Doctrine to allow the canal in the america’s to be governed by the French. In an address to Congress Hayes made it clear that the plan violated America’s power in the hemisphere and warned about the incoming power the French would have in the area. Many private investors of the plan backed off as a result but the French kept pushing it. Hayes’ position was later codified and made part of our foreign policy knows as the Roosevelt Corrolary to the Monroe Doctrine.
The project ultimately went forward with French power behind it but American engineers were ultimately proved right and the canal plan was deemed impossible and abandoned. Hayes did a good job standing up to French influence in the region but couldn’t kill it completely. However, his ability to see the future and what Theodore Roosevelt would ultimately do requires a decent score here.
Hayes also had to deal with growing tensions in Mexico as criminals would cross the border and attack American interests (hey, maybe Donald Trump in stuck in 1881?) He issued an order to the army to stop them at all costs even if it meant invading Mexico to do it. The Mexican government went ballistic but seeing what was going on ultimately supported the move and helped to get the border more secure, resulting in Hayes pulling back on his order to cross the border.
Chinese immigration was also becoming a problem in the west. Hayes supported an open border. People in the west did not. When the state of California passed a law that restricted Chinese immigration in violation of the federal Constitution Hayes would have none of it. To try to make Hayes look bad Congress passed a law in support of California which Hayes vetoed. The people of the west despised him after that. But he knew that wouldn’t be the end of the matter so Hayes began working a new immigration treaty with China. By the end of 1880 a new treaty was in place between the nations on immigration, trade and other issues. The treaty ultimately went into effect after he left office.
Executive Skills/Congress
He tried. He appointed people to his cabinet that were not party bosses and of course that hurt him within his own party. The Democrats never considered him a legitimate President so they never worked with him. He angered the West with Chinese policy. He stood up to Congress’ continued encroachments into executive power and by the end of his term he had taken some power back on federal appointments. His economic policy was at odds with Congress but it worked.
Justice/Rights
The manner is which Hayes allowed reconstruction to end ended up being an awful thing. There is no other way to say that. The question remains though if he could have actually done anything anyway. By the middle of his term the Congress was run by the Democrats and the army was in the west. With no congressional or military support to get the troops back into the south to punish them for breaking the promises they made to him, he was left no choice to just let it happen. But frankly, he should have seen it all coming. Maybe he did. There are books written that the ultimate reason why the election commission gave Hayes the presidency was that he made a deal behind the scenes with southern democrats to remove the military during his term. If so, he gets an even worse mark here.
His Indian policy was similar to Grant’s. But the continued removal polices that were still part of the national fabric led to another war with Indians. Hayes ultimate abandoned removal polices which didn’t make the situation any better. Another place where he tried but ultimately didn’t get very far.
Context
Like John Quincy Adams, Hayes was behind the 8-ball before he was sworn in. Never being given the respect of the office by the Democrats his attempt to reform the government angered his own party and he had nowhere to turn. He did well on the economy given the times, failed reconstruction when he should have known what would happen, and did a decent job with foreign policy such as it was during his four years. Hayes kept his promise to not seek re-election but he wouldn’t have won anyway.
Conclusion
Hayes, like John Quincy Adams, was a failure because of how he ultimately entered office. Both men were good men who tried to fix what was truly broken and rise above party infighting and politics. Both failed. On persuasion Hayes gets a 3, on crisis 2, economy 6, foreign policy 6, Congress 3, civil rights 3, and context 5. 28 total points for the ultimate beard wielding man. When Garfield entered office Hayes considered it a good result of his time in office and the two worked together as one was leaving and the other entering the office. His political protégé’ William McKinley would ultimate be President as well. So in that Hayes has a good legacy in the office, just not a great one. And so he will be ultimately at best in the middle of the pack.
Public Acumen/Persuasion
He definitely gets a 10 for the beard. The best Presidential beard in American history.
Hayes assumed the office after Grant in the most disputed election in our history to the time. Bush Gore is the only one close since. Reports from all over the country were mixed with who between Hayes and the democrat Tilden won the election. Some states sent two different elector ballots to Washington and the entire thing was a mess. The Congress ultimately created a commission to handle the matter. It was supposed to be a commission whereby there would be an equal amount of republicans and democrats on it with one independent vote. The independent guy, though, was caught in a scandal and had to be removed, and the final seat fell to a republican. With an 8-7 advantage on the commission, the republicans certified the election for Hayes and he beat Tilden. Democrats never considered him a legitimate President and because of if, like John Quincy Adams decades prior, he was doomed to fail in office.
Hayes tried to change Washington though. He championed the cause that Grant picked up too late in civil service reform and fought his own party. When Congress wouldn’t work with him on it he issued executive orders end running them. But in the midterm elections Democrats won the House back and Hayes presidency was basically doomed.
War & Crisis
Hayes had to deal with reconstruction. He was a radical republican and wanted to protect voting rights in the south but he didn’t have the government support behind him and the ongoing struggles with using the military was proving unwinnable. In contrast to his words to the public Hayes began working on removing all federal troops from the south. He clung to the condition that he would only do it if the southern states respected the rights of blacks to vote. They promised and he removed the troops effectively ended reconstruction. And within a month of the troops leaving the southern states passed laws that effectively gutted the 15th amendment in practice.
The economy took a turn for the worse at the same time and Hayes had to deal with that while in office. He believed Grant was right to stick the country to the gold standard but he didn’t have the support in Congress to make that work right away. The economy was a mess for the first two years of his term, but in the middle of his term he got it fixed and the economy boomed by the end of his term.
The only other main crisis that Hayes faced was a canal in central America to connect the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. It’s covered more in foreign policy however.
Economy
Grant got it moving again before he left but then it sunk back after Hayes was elected. It took two years to fix it, and by sticking with the gold standard and making it clear what bills he would sign and what he wouldn’t, the economy bounced back in his final two years. It was roaring by the time he left office because he kept his word on what he would support and what he wouldn’t support and investors were able to project long term gains as a result building a confidence in the economy that the hadn’t had in years.
Foreign Policy
His was dominated by a canal question linking the Atlantic and the Pacific. With international talks in Paris over the topic it was proposed to build the canal through Panama. American engineers in Paris attacked the plan as impossible but the French mainly supported the Panama option to build the canal at sea level and the powers that be supported that plan instead of America’s. Hayes didn’t support the plan as it was basically a French plan and Hayes believed that it would be a repudiation of the Monroe Doctrine to allow the canal in the america’s to be governed by the French. In an address to Congress Hayes made it clear that the plan violated America’s power in the hemisphere and warned about the incoming power the French would have in the area. Many private investors of the plan backed off as a result but the French kept pushing it. Hayes’ position was later codified and made part of our foreign policy knows as the Roosevelt Corrolary to the Monroe Doctrine.
The project ultimately went forward with French power behind it but American engineers were ultimately proved right and the canal plan was deemed impossible and abandoned. Hayes did a good job standing up to French influence in the region but couldn’t kill it completely. However, his ability to see the future and what Theodore Roosevelt would ultimately do requires a decent score here.
Hayes also had to deal with growing tensions in Mexico as criminals would cross the border and attack American interests (hey, maybe Donald Trump in stuck in 1881?) He issued an order to the army to stop them at all costs even if it meant invading Mexico to do it. The Mexican government went ballistic but seeing what was going on ultimately supported the move and helped to get the border more secure, resulting in Hayes pulling back on his order to cross the border.
Chinese immigration was also becoming a problem in the west. Hayes supported an open border. People in the west did not. When the state of California passed a law that restricted Chinese immigration in violation of the federal Constitution Hayes would have none of it. To try to make Hayes look bad Congress passed a law in support of California which Hayes vetoed. The people of the west despised him after that. But he knew that wouldn’t be the end of the matter so Hayes began working a new immigration treaty with China. By the end of 1880 a new treaty was in place between the nations on immigration, trade and other issues. The treaty ultimately went into effect after he left office.
Executive Skills/Congress
He tried. He appointed people to his cabinet that were not party bosses and of course that hurt him within his own party. The Democrats never considered him a legitimate President so they never worked with him. He angered the West with Chinese policy. He stood up to Congress’ continued encroachments into executive power and by the end of his term he had taken some power back on federal appointments. His economic policy was at odds with Congress but it worked.
Justice/Rights
The manner is which Hayes allowed reconstruction to end ended up being an awful thing. There is no other way to say that. The question remains though if he could have actually done anything anyway. By the middle of his term the Congress was run by the Democrats and the army was in the west. With no congressional or military support to get the troops back into the south to punish them for breaking the promises they made to him, he was left no choice to just let it happen. But frankly, he should have seen it all coming. Maybe he did. There are books written that the ultimate reason why the election commission gave Hayes the presidency was that he made a deal behind the scenes with southern democrats to remove the military during his term. If so, he gets an even worse mark here.
His Indian policy was similar to Grant’s. But the continued removal polices that were still part of the national fabric led to another war with Indians. Hayes ultimate abandoned removal polices which didn’t make the situation any better. Another place where he tried but ultimately didn’t get very far.
Context
Like John Quincy Adams, Hayes was behind the 8-ball before he was sworn in. Never being given the respect of the office by the Democrats his attempt to reform the government angered his own party and he had nowhere to turn. He did well on the economy given the times, failed reconstruction when he should have known what would happen, and did a decent job with foreign policy such as it was during his four years. Hayes kept his promise to not seek re-election but he wouldn’t have won anyway.
Conclusion
Hayes, like John Quincy Adams, was a failure because of how he ultimately entered office. Both men were good men who tried to fix what was truly broken and rise above party infighting and politics. Both failed. On persuasion Hayes gets a 3, on crisis 2, economy 6, foreign policy 6, Congress 3, civil rights 3, and context 5. 28 total points for the ultimate beard wielding man. When Garfield entered office Hayes considered it a good result of his time in office and the two worked together as one was leaving and the other entering the office. His political protégé’ William McKinley would ultimate be President as well. So in that Hayes has a good legacy in the office, just not a great one. And so he will be ultimately at best in the middle of the pack.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
James Garfield (1881)
Public Acumen/Persuasion
Garfield would have been a good President. He had all the markings of it. He was brilliant, he knew politics, he had a clear vision for what he wanted to do, he had an iron will that was tested in the only true battle of his presidency and had natural leadership abilities that far too few men in the office before and after had.
But he was taken from us before any of that could be realized. He was a great public speaker and with his speeches we know what he would have liked to do. But an assassin took another President – coincidentally, standing next to Garfield when he was shot was none other than Robert Todd Lincoln. Had medicine at the time not been stuck in the dark ages still Garfield should have survived his wounds. But the times weren’t changing fast enough. And because of that we have no idea how Garfield would have done leading the country and pulling them with him in to the policy battles he wanted to fight. We do know, though, that he stared down his own party bosses and won. So that counts for something.
War & Crisis
The entirety of his tenure in office was controlled by one issue – the appointment of the Director of Customs for the Port of New York City – considered the most important non-cabinet level position in all of the government. Upon taking office Garfield immediately went to work trying to get the factions of his party to work together. He did a great job with all cabinet appointments as a result save this appointment. The fighting took weeks and months. Senator Conklin believed that he should be in charge of that appointment and Secretary of State Blaine his lifelong interparty adversary wanted Garfield to exert his power. The Senate ceased to function over the fight. Conklin and his main lieutenant decided that they would resign their Senate seats as a protest. When the did Garfield got his way. Upon returning to New York, Conklin was made aware that he wasn’t going to be reappointed to the Senate. Garfield did a masterful job in bring the party together under his watch and destroying the people that stood in his way.
Economy
Garfield was brilliant when it came to economic issues and almost immediately upon entering office he refinanced federal debts at a lower interest rate with his knowledge saving the government over $10 million a year.
Foreign Policy
There wasn’t time for one under his watch. The entirety of his presidency was taken over by his cabinet selections and the port of New York fight. With Secretary Blaine focusing on that fight neither of them did anything with foreign policy in his brief few months.
Executive Skills/Congress
He at least started off well in that he ultimately won the fight over his cabinet but it took the entire time he was President to do it. Future presidents benefited from his fight in that the Congress lost more of its power over executive actions.
Justice/Rights
Garfield supported the rights of blacks. His solution was that only education could ultimately solve the racial problems in the nation. So with that he proposed a nationwide education system funded by the federal government. He appointed blacks to low level federal positions as well. But Congress didn’t support his education plan (he was ahead of his time there by about 60 years) and in his short time the rest of the civil rights issues took a back seat to cabinet problems.
Context
What could have been. James Garfield could have been a great President. He was most likely going to at least be a good President. But we will never know. He wanted civil service reform, he wanted to attack corruption even in his own party, he wanted equal rights and universal education and he was able to manage the economy better than most. But he was taken from us from a guy that wanted to run a post office that Garfield refused. Crazy postal workers – topping the news stories since 1881.
Conclusion
On persuasion Garfield will get a 2, on crisis a 3, on economy 5, foreign policy 1, congress 2, civil rights 2 and context 4. 19 total points. Much like Zachary Taylor we are left to wonder. Garfield was in the mold of a Theodore Roosevelt but served in a time of Chester Arthur and Grover Cleveland. All we have with him is hope, Robert Todd Lincoln standing next to him when he was shot, and John Hay losing another close friend in the Oval Office. It was going to be a difficult time for the next few Presidents. It might not have been for Garfield.
Public Acumen/Persuasion
Garfield would have been a good President. He had all the markings of it. He was brilliant, he knew politics, he had a clear vision for what he wanted to do, he had an iron will that was tested in the only true battle of his presidency and had natural leadership abilities that far too few men in the office before and after had.
But he was taken from us before any of that could be realized. He was a great public speaker and with his speeches we know what he would have liked to do. But an assassin took another President – coincidentally, standing next to Garfield when he was shot was none other than Robert Todd Lincoln. Had medicine at the time not been stuck in the dark ages still Garfield should have survived his wounds. But the times weren’t changing fast enough. And because of that we have no idea how Garfield would have done leading the country and pulling them with him in to the policy battles he wanted to fight. We do know, though, that he stared down his own party bosses and won. So that counts for something.
War & Crisis
The entirety of his tenure in office was controlled by one issue – the appointment of the Director of Customs for the Port of New York City – considered the most important non-cabinet level position in all of the government. Upon taking office Garfield immediately went to work trying to get the factions of his party to work together. He did a great job with all cabinet appointments as a result save this appointment. The fighting took weeks and months. Senator Conklin believed that he should be in charge of that appointment and Secretary of State Blaine his lifelong interparty adversary wanted Garfield to exert his power. The Senate ceased to function over the fight. Conklin and his main lieutenant decided that they would resign their Senate seats as a protest. When the did Garfield got his way. Upon returning to New York, Conklin was made aware that he wasn’t going to be reappointed to the Senate. Garfield did a masterful job in bring the party together under his watch and destroying the people that stood in his way.
Economy
Garfield was brilliant when it came to economic issues and almost immediately upon entering office he refinanced federal debts at a lower interest rate with his knowledge saving the government over $10 million a year.
Foreign Policy
There wasn’t time for one under his watch. The entirety of his presidency was taken over by his cabinet selections and the port of New York fight. With Secretary Blaine focusing on that fight neither of them did anything with foreign policy in his brief few months.
Executive Skills/Congress
He at least started off well in that he ultimately won the fight over his cabinet but it took the entire time he was President to do it. Future presidents benefited from his fight in that the Congress lost more of its power over executive actions.
Justice/Rights
Garfield supported the rights of blacks. His solution was that only education could ultimately solve the racial problems in the nation. So with that he proposed a nationwide education system funded by the federal government. He appointed blacks to low level federal positions as well. But Congress didn’t support his education plan (he was ahead of his time there by about 60 years) and in his short time the rest of the civil rights issues took a back seat to cabinet problems.
Context
What could have been. James Garfield could have been a great President. He was most likely going to at least be a good President. But we will never know. He wanted civil service reform, he wanted to attack corruption even in his own party, he wanted equal rights and universal education and he was able to manage the economy better than most. But he was taken from us from a guy that wanted to run a post office that Garfield refused. Crazy postal workers – topping the news stories since 1881.
Conclusion
On persuasion Garfield will get a 2, on crisis a 3, on economy 5, foreign policy 1, congress 2, civil rights 2 and context 4. 19 total points. Much like Zachary Taylor we are left to wonder. Garfield was in the mold of a Theodore Roosevelt but served in a time of Chester Arthur and Grover Cleveland. All we have with him is hope, Robert Todd Lincoln standing next to him when he was shot, and John Hay losing another close friend in the Oval Office. It was going to be a difficult time for the next few Presidents. It might not have been for Garfield.
dparker713
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
