Ranking the Presidents on their Constitutionality

Surprised H.W. Bush is so high and Ford is so low. Not that Ford did much, but I do not recall nothing much out of bounds with what he did. I will admit I’m very weak on his Presidency.

Franklin’s Opus asked a panel of experts to rate each President of the United States by evaluating his performance in three categories, on a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the best, as to how well they each:

[LIST=1]
[]faithfully executed the laws and obeyed the Constitution;
[
]promoted liberty and prosperity;
[*]exercised good leadership.
[/LIST]

Survey of thePresidents of the United States

1 Like

Hmmm, Washington surprises me a bit: he was an excellent leader and president, he faithfully executed the laws and the economy was growing from a post-Revolutionary War rut but when focusing solely on Constitutionality…he occasionally defined his own interpretation on Constitutionality (and it set a lot of precedents). Tyler didn’t have any kind of leadership and Reagan had a habit of not executing laws where the interfered with foreign policy plus the war on drugs is somewhat contrary to the idea of states rights, and he was *very *Executive Order happy (though he certainly exercised good leadership). I’m only looking at those top 6 in my various criticism (not being mean to Reagan out of spite, he just happens to be there & I know more about him than the others)

I think Reagan is too high based on the first quality. But he did a great job on the second and third. Van Buren should be much higher. I would probably swap them.

1 Like

I have my reservations about George W. Bush, but I think it’s bogus that they ranked him below the Bill of Wrongs and FDR, and probably Jimmy Carter (especially on the second and third criteria).

1 Like

This is an old thread but I find it quite laughable that George w. Bush is placed only one above Nixon and Two above Woodrow Wilson. Wilson sent journalists to prison. I disagreed with Bush on a number of things but to put him only one or two above some of the most unconstitutional presidents we have ever had is somewhat absurd.

1 Like

Here’s my ranking:

Rank President

  1. George Washington
  2. Abraham Lincoln
  3. John Adams
  4. Ronald Reagan
  5. Theodore Roosevelt
  6. Harry S. Truman
  7. Thomas Jefferson
  8. Gerald R. Ford
  9. James K. Polk
  10. Andrew Jackson
  11. James Madison
  12. James Monroe
  13. John Quincy Adams
  14. George W. Bush
  15. Calvin Coolidge
  16. William McKinley
  17. Warren G. Harding
  18. Chester A. Arthur
  19. Rutherford B. Hayes
  20. William Howard Taft
  21. Ulysses S. Grant
  22. George H.W. Bush
  23. Zachary Taylor
  24. Herbert Hoover
  25. Bill Clinton
  26. John F. Kennedy
  27. Grover Cleveland
  28. Benjamin Harrison
  29. James A. Garfield
  30. William Henry Harrison
  31. Andrew Johnson
  32. John Tyler
  33. Dwight D. Eisenhower
  34. Martin Van Buren
    
  35. Millard Fillmore
  36. Woodrow Wilson
  37. Franklin D. Roosevelt
  38. Lyndon B. Johnson
  39. Jimmy Carter
  40. James Buchanan
  41. Franklin Pierce
  42. Richard M. Nixon

I just don’t know much about certain Presidents, such as Martin Van Buren, Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison, Rutherford B. Hayes, William Howard Taft or William MiCkinley. I placed from 35 (Millard Fillmore) on down those that were either downright harmful or totally irresponsible. My list at the top goes against the grain but those are my preferences. They show my deep “blue” bent politically.

How could John Adams rate so high on your list? The Alien and Sedition Acts trashed the First Amendment. Newspaper editors went to jail for expressing their political views.

[quote=“Sendgop, post:7, topic:42760”]
How could John Adams rate so high on your list? The Alien and Sedition Acts trashed the First Amendment. Newspaper editors went to jail for expressing their political views.
[/quote]We were in a war or near-war situation. Also the Constitution and amendments were new. Sort of like blind men feeling an elephant.

GWBUSH should rank near the bottom. WHY? I was asked to put together a presentation on UN Agenda 21. Little did I realize the under taking. At somewhere around 250 slides I called it quits and told those that had asked for it that it was “bigger than a breadbox” which is an offhand comment of saying its far larger than one can imagine.

In the many months of research and digging into the subject I was stunned at how much of a supporter GWB was and if one does any level of investigation into the UN you will find GWB name all over it, so much so it changed my whole outlook on his presidency, he gave away our sovereignty and laid the groundwork for the UN taking over much of America’s landmarks. They are grabbing our history across the US and rewriting it.

[quote=“JBG, post:8, topic:42760”]
We were in a war or near-war situation.
[/quote]War is not a good excuse for violating our rights. War should *only *be prosecuted in defense of them. If war requires the violation of our rights, then the government is doing the exact opposite of what it ought to be doing and is the enemy.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–**That to secure these rights, **Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

It cost Adams and ultimately the Federalist Party big time. Adams lost the 1800 election to Thomas Jefferson, and for the Federalists it was all down hill of there. They got weaker and weaker until the party disappeared completely before the 1820 presidential election when James Monroe ran unopposed.

So far the first amendment goes, Woodrow Wilson and his stinking administration tried to pull the same thing during World War I. That also blew up in his face along with The League of Nations. Woodrow Wilson is one of the most overrated presidents in my opinion. Wilson and his attorney general were even worse than the Obama and his two attorney mouth pieces. At least there are still avenues of dissent today. In Wilson’s time you could go to jail. I’m no fan of Eugene Debs, but he should not have gone to jail for his opposition to America’s involvement in “The Great War.”

[quote=“Rightwing_Nutjob, post:10, topic:42760”]
War is not a good excuse for violating our rights. War should *only *be prosecuted in defense of them. If war requires the violation of our rights, then the government is doing the exact opposite of what it ought to be doing and is the enemy.
[/quote]The U.S. was extraordinarily fragile at that time. Neither Britain nor France were crazy about our fully independent existence. War always results in rights being restricted.

Similarly, I’m no fan of Joseph Franklin Rutherford, but [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Franklin_Rutherford#Imprisonment_and_release]he should never have been charged with “attempting to cause insubordination, disloyalty, refusal of duty in the armed forces and obstructing the recruitment and enlistment service of the U.S. while it was at war”, let alone spent time in prison.

Maybe it should be said that Wilson is severely under-reviled.

Our Rights should always be violated in times of war, and to a large enough extent that we do not forget to reverse a single compromise at wars end.

To an extent, I agree. However some rights should NEVER be violated–war or not. The right to keep and bear arms, for example.

That may be. They’re violated in peacetime with no good excuse either. It still doesn’t make it right.

[quote=“Rightwing_Nutjob, post:16, topic:42760”]
That may be. They’re violated in peacetime with no good excuse either. It still doesn’t make it right.
[/quote]Thing about wars and they’re better being won than lost.

2 Likes

Not if you lose who you are in the process.

1 Like

[quote=“Fantasy_Chaser, post:18, topic:42760”]
Not if you lose who you are in the process.
[/quote]If you lose those kinds of wars you lose who you are forever.

Just wars do not require a government to violate its citizens rights. If you can’t win the war without violating the rights of your citizens, then you deserve to lose the war.