Do you mean to say there is not category for a nice old man with a bad memory? I think Dr. Alvin S. Felzenberg, who I also know well and respect, has a much more cogent system of ranking Presidents. The American Political Science Association is so partisanly lopsided that their rankings should not be treated as credible.

Expand full comment

Well, for all we can admire FDR did, his mixed record certainly keeps off the "best" list. His main virtue was that he inspired the nation to pull itself out of the doldrums, no mean accomplishment, and then reboot quickly to win a world war. Now, that's nothing to sneeze at: it's the hallmark of true leadership, and that alone puts him in a special category of reverence. But was the New Deal all that good for the country? And was he blinded by Uncle Joe into ceding half of Europe to communist imperialism? Truman had that figured out; his boss didn't. Mixed record, as I said.

The other Roosevelt comes out better, but still, he helped start the US on the path to destructive Progressivism. A blot on his record, just as Trump's bowing to pressure from the Medical Mafia on the coronavirus, really the main legitimate complaint against his administration; the rest was pretty awesome!

I would rank Clinton behind Carter; the latter was merely inept; the former deeply corrupt, far worse than Nixon. I believe the rot in our system today, and especially in the Democratic Party, dates to Clinton's unprecedented corruption.

Expand full comment