Ranking the Presidents, 2021

Today C-SPAN released its fourth presidential historians survey. The survey follows C-SPAN’s earlier surveys of presidential greatness, which were run in 2000, 2009, and 2017.

I previously wrote a blog post about presidential greatness surveys for Presidents Day in 2019. Although it is not squarely within the scope of this blog, I have always enjoyed studying the U.S. Presidents, and one way to do that is through the various rankings of greatness, which began with Arthur Schlesinger’s first survey in 1948.

These rankings are, of course, subjective, but they encourage discussion and study, and the changes in rankings over time also tell us something about how our attitudes toward history changes. Here are a few of my takeaways from this new survey:

• The top three presidents are nearly always the same: Abraham Lincoln in first, followed by George Washington, and then Franklin D. Roosevelt. The 2000 C-SPAN survey was unusual in that it placed FDR ahead of Washington, but in 2009 and thereafter it reverted to the norm. Theodore Roosevelt is by far the most common #4 – it used to be that he would be surpassed by Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, or Woodrow Wilson, but that has become less common.
• Dwight D. Eisenhower has held on to #5, the spot he first achieved in the 2017 C-SPAN survey. Like many Republicans, he was underrated by the historians when he first left office, initially being ranked #22 by Schlesinger in 1962. By the 2000 C-SPAN survey he was #9 and he has continued to move up, although I very much doubt he will crack the top four.
• Remarkably, #1-#9 are unchanged from 2017 to 2021. It may be that these surveys are self-reinforcing, but historical opinion seems to be coalescing.
• Likewise, poor James Buchanan maintains his lowly position at the bottom of the list, again as is the case in nearly every survey. (As I wrote in 2019, I would personally place Andrew Johnson in last place, but I’m certainly not a Buchanan advocate either.)
• The biggest gainer since the 2017 survey is Chester Alan Arthur, who surges five places from #35 to #30. I can’t say that I’ve made a study of Arthur, and I’m not aware of any resurgence in Arthur scholarship in the past four years, so this may be an anomaly. Likewise, I still can’t explain the continued fall of Grover Cleveland, from #17 in 2000 to #21 in 2009, #23 in 2017, and now #25 in 2021.
• Also surging up are the Adams, each gaining four places – John Adams from #19 to #15 and John Quincy Adams from #21 to #17. This is well deserved, and in fact I would place John Adams a couple spots higher. John Adams’ renaissance began with the publication of David McCollough’s book in 2001. I would attribute the recent increase for both Adams, though, to their lifelong and steadfast stands against slavery. While the reputations of other historical figures have suffered due to their racial attitudes, the Adams’ principled stands look even better in contrast. I am also happy to see John Adams move one slot ahead of James Madison – I wrote in 2019 that Madison ahead of Adams was hard to understand, and that Madison was likely benefiting from his non-presidential achievements (i.e. “Father of the Constitution.”)
• Conversely, the biggest fall in the rankings is once again Andrew Jackson, who drops four spots from #18 to #22. His freefall continues as he was #13 is the 2000 C-SPAN survey, and was #6 in both the 1962 Schlesinger and 1982 Chicago Tribute surveys.
• Likewise, Woodrow Wilson dropped two spots, from #11 to #13, continuing his recent fall. He was #6 in C-SPAN’s 2000 survey, falling to #9 in 2009, and has been as high as #4 (in both Schlesinger surveys in 1948 and 1962). He used to benefit, in my opinion, from the fact that he was a Ph.D. political scientist, and therefore a favorite of the scholars participating in the survey. Andrew Jackson and Woodrow Wilson used to be fixtures in the top ten, and even sometimes in the top five, but their views on race have led to a reassessment. (Wilson’s racial views were truly terrible, even compared to his contemporaries.)
• Also suffering big drops are James K. Polk, from #14 to #18, and Zachary Taylor, from #32 to #35. Both southerners and slaveholders, and that’s likely not a coincidence. In my opinion #18 is too low for Polk, as I elaborate on in my rankings, below.
• I saw another commentator today say that John F. Kennedy’s continued presence in the top ten (this time at #8) is the ultimate triumph of “style over substance,” and I have to agree. He wasn’t a bad president, but it’s just hard to rank him this high.
• Another ranking that continues to puzzle me is James Monroe (#12 in the new survey, his best showing of the four). I may need to study up on Monroe, but from what I have read about him I just don’t see what justifies such a high ranking for him.
• Given the partisan bias that I often detect in these surveys, I am happy to see three Republican presidents making gains in this new survey, each increasing by two spots: Ulysses S. Grant from #22 to #20, William McKinley from #16 to #14, and Calvin Coolidge from #26 to #24. All three have been the subject of excellent new biographies and reassessments in recent years (Grant, Coolidge, McKinley). Grant in particular has benefited from his strong record in favor of civil rights, moving up from #33 in the 2000 C-SPAN survey, and I believe he should eventually rise to #12 or so. Coolidge likewise should be in the #15-#20 range. Conversely, I think McKinley has probably topped out at #14, and if anything should perhaps fall back a bit.

The rankings of recent presidents is fraught with peril. It is impossible for those taking the survey to separate their personal political views from their scholarly judgments. This tends to mean that recent Republican presidents are underrated. In addition, it can be legitimately difficult to judge recent presidents because the consequences of their decisions are not yet known. Did the 2008 housing crisis lead to a reassessment of Bill Clinton’s deregulation of the economy? Will the aftermath of President Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan affect how we view George W. Bush’s decision to intervene there? It can often take several decades for political passions to subside and for history to pass its judgment.

Having said that, a few more thoughts on the new C-SPAN survey and the more recent presidents:

• The big headline from this survey is the ranking of Donald Trump. I predicted in 2019 that professional historians – not exactly his crowd – would not treat him kindly, and I was right. He enters the rankings at #41 with only the truly terrible presidents Franklin Pierce, Andrew Johnson, and James Buchanan behind him. Trump is ranked behind William Henry Harrison, who died after 30 days in office and didn’t do anything. It’s impossible to predict where his ranking goes longterm – he is too recent and is even considering a bid to return to the presidency.
• In contrast, Barack Obama has moved up the rankings and entered the top ten, at #10. I think there is a Trump effect going on here as well – historians’ dislike of Trump leads to nostalgia for Obama. I would be very surprised if he moves any higher – I can’t really see who he could move ahead of – and I’d expect him to fall back at least a few spots in future surveys.
• The trajectory I predict for Obama is much like what has happened to Bill Clinton, who peaked at #14 in 2009 (the first survey taken after he left office), fell to #15 in 2017, and has now fallen another four spots to #19. Clinton’s fall also may have something to do with the passing of Hillary Clinton as an active historical figure; current political loyalties no longer bolster the Clintons’ standing. I also notice, though, that Richard Nixon fell three spots in this survey, from #28 to #31, and I wonder if the double-impeachment of Trump also led historians to look more harshly at the impeachment of Clinton and the near-impeachment and resignation of Nixon.
• I would add in regard to Nixon that he, like Lyndon Johnson, is very difficult to rate. Nixon had a strong record in foreign policy and in domestic achievement, but both are sullied by Watergate and resignation, as well as the fact that Ronald Reagan ultimately changed the direction of the Republican Party in both foreign and domestic policy. Likewise, Lyndon Johnson has a stellar record of achievement in domestic legislation, offset by the Vietnam War. Overall, I think C-SPAN’s new poll has LBJ about right at #11, while Nixon continues to be underrated due to Watergate.
• Jimmy Carter at #26 is overrated. There is a great deal of affection and nostalgia for him, understandably, because he is such a good and decent person. But he simply wasn’t a very good president and, based on his record, he should be 8-10 slots lower.
• Ronald Reagan is underrated at #9. In my personal top ten (see below), I placed him #5, although I think the five presidents from #4 to #8 are very close and he could be anywhere in that range. I cannot see the case, though, for putting Reagan behind JFK. Reagan’s foreign policy achievements alone call for a higher ranking, and his role in founding the conservative movement justifies it all the more.
• George H. W. Bush is also underrated. In fact, he dropped one place since 2017, from #20 to #21. That surprises me; I predicted in 2019 that he would continue to move up. And he should continue to move up. His foreign policy record was exemplary: in just one term he masterfully managed of the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the reunification of Germany, and Desert Storm in Iraq. His domestic policy record was fine: Clean Air Act, Americans with Disabilities Act. His economic record was used against him in 1992 by Bill Clinton, but looking back, he managed the federal budget prudently, and the recession on his watch was overdue, mild, and ended before he left office. Affection and respect for him has become widespread in the years since his death, and I am very surprised this hasn’t come through in the survey.
• Finally, I am not surprised to see George W. Bush moving up the list. He was #36 in 2009, #33 in 2017, and now #29. Probably a bit of Trump effect here too, as more liberal scholars remember Bush favorably, in comparison. It’s hard to say where Bush will ultimately settle in these rankings; as I wrote above, his foreign policy record is still difficult to judge. In 2019, I compared his record to Harry Truman’s, and if things go his way, I could foresee a scenario where he rises, if not into the top ten, perhaps into the low teens. The high teens or low twenties may be more likely.

The C-SPAN survey offers a huge amount of detail, far beyond what I’ve analyzed in this post. Each president is rated on a 100-point scale in each of ten areas, allowing for an overall score of 0-1000. The lowest-rated president, Buchanan, received a 227/1000, while the highest, Lincoln, received 897/1000.

I did take a little time to analyze the cumulative scores, rather than just the rankings, and found that, despite my earlier statements, the 2021 survey shows a noticeable move in favor of Republican presidents, and against Democratic presidents, compared to the 2017 survey. On average, Democratic presidents’ scores fell by 24.3/1000 points (including Andrew Johnson as a Democrat), while Republican presidents increased, on average, by 3.3 points (discounting Donald Trump, who was not in the 2017 survey). More remarkably, the seven biggest “gainers” from 2017 to 2021 were all Republicans: George W. Bush (the biggest gainer), Grant, Coolidge, Harding, Arthur, Garfield, and Taft. Conversely the six biggest “fallers” were all Democrats: Woodrow Wilson fell the furthest, followed by Andrew Johnson, Jackson, Clinton, Polk, and Lyndon Johnson. I have to wonder if the 2021 survey participants had more representation from the right wing of the ideological spectrum (C-SPAN has said they included more scholars in 2021 than in past surveys).

Finally, if you have made it this far, I am sure you are wondering about my personal rankings. I have not taken the time to do a complete top-to-bottom ranking, but I have put together my personal top ten:

1. Abraham Lincoln
2. George Washington
3. Franklin D. Roosevelt
4. Theodore Roosevelt
5. Ronald Reagan
6. Harry S. Truman
7. Dwight D. Eisenhower
8. Thomas Jefferson
9. George H. W. Bush
10. James K. Polk

I have hinted at some of this above, and I also shared my rationale for this list in 2019 (it is unchanged), but I will repeat my thinking again below:

• My top four are the same as C-SPAN. The top three are easy; nearly every one of these rankings have those three, in that order, and I agree with that.
• Spots #4-8 were close in my mind. I ultimately agreed with C-SPAN with Theodore Roosevelt at 4th. He did a great deal to establish the United States as a world power and his embrace of progressivism was a major turning point for the nation. Unlike the top three, he achieved greatness without serving during some epochal event.
• I placed Reagan four spots higher than C-SPAN did; I placed greater value on his leadership in ending the Cold War, a pivotal event in American and world history.
• I flipped Truman ahead of Eisenhower, although they are close in my mind. Truman made perhaps the most difficult decision in presidential history when he chose to use the atomic bomb. He created the key institutions and programs to win the Cold War: NATO, the United Nations, the Marshall Plan, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the CIA. He also made the politically difficult decision to fire General MacArthur. Eisenhower ended the Korean War and masterfully led the institutions that Truman had created. Only in recent years is he getting the credit he is due for his skillful administration.
• Jefferson benefits in part from achievements outside the presidency, such as his authorship of the Declaration of Independence. In his first term he set aside his ideological rigidity to purchase Louisiana territory, and he navigated the foreign policy tug-of-war between England and France. But his second term went off the rails with a disastrous trade embargo and foreign policy that led to the War of 1812.
• I dropped JFK and LBJ out of the top ten. I think they were both good presidents. JFK’s signature achievement was his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis; beyond that he is remembered for his public image and his rhetoric, and his advocacy for programs, such as the civil rights legislation and the moon landing, that were achieved by later presidents. As for LBJ, he stepped in and passed those civil rights bills, as well as the Great Society package of social programs, but was drug down by the morass of Vietnam.
• Replacing JFK and LBJ on my list are George H. W. Bush and James K. Polk. I addressed Bush above; in just one term he masterfully managed of the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the reunification of Germany, and Desert Storm in Iraq. In some ways, Bush worked himself out of the job; his resolution of nearly every important foreign policy issue made him “yesterday’s man” and allowed the nation to reject him in favor of Clinton, who focused on domestic policy. As for Polk, he fought and won the Mexican War, securing Texas, California, and the southwest; he also negotiated with Great Britain to secure the Oregon Territory. He declined to run for a second term because he’d achieved everything he wanted to do. The United States would look very different today if not for Polk.

Afternotes:

I posted this on June 30. On July 5, Conrad Black (also known as Baron Black of Crossharbour) offered his own analysis of the same survey, which in many ways tracks with the thoughts I offered, which I recommend for comparison. Lord Black has written excellent biographies of FDR and Nixon which I highly recommend, as well as a book about Trump that I have not read. His post makes the case for higher rankings for Nixon and Trump.

For a contrary view, in a New York Times op-ed, historian Mark Updegrove makes the case against a higher Trump rating.

Finally, “The Executive Power” blog posted its own presidential rankings, in comparison to the C-SPAN rankings. The post includes more detailed thoughts on Polk and Kennedy, both of which I generally agree with.