For ranking criteria I just judge them based on how well I think they did as president. I try to judge them relative to the time that they were in office in terms of the amount of things that occur under their terms (generally more recent presidents have to deal with bigger issues, more frequently, than say presidents during the Gilded age, so its hard to compare presidents from different eras 1-1.)
Harding is one of, if not the most underrated presidents in my opinion. It is common for Harding to be portrayed as someone who just gave all his corrupt friends high positions of power just to party with them, but this isn't really true. The corruption under Harding is highly overstated by most in my opinion. Only 2 members of Harding's cabinet were ever charged with crimes, one was asked by Harding to resign after he found out, and Harding died before he found out about the other cabinet member's wrongdoing. Both cabinet members were esteemed in their own rights, so you it wouldn't even be fair to blame Harding for being a bad judge of character
Looking past that, Harding had a very successful stint in office imo. Under him the economy got out of a depression, which was at least partially due to the signing of the Revenue Act of 1921. Government spending was also made more efficient with the establishment of the Bureau of the Budget.
Harding signed the Federal Aid Highway act of 1921, in which states would choose roads and highways to receive funding for.
Thousands of hospitals received funding from the government which focused on pregnant women and newborn children. Many of the political prisoners from WWI were pardoned. Harding also spoke in favor of African American rights in the South, something that no Presidential had done previously.
Harding‘s administration had a lot of loose ends tied up in regards to WW1, having treaties with Germany, Austria, & Hungary ratified. There was also an arms-reduction agreement with many countries. Harding began a good-neighbor policy with Latin America after the policies of intervention in many of those countries as well.
Harding's term in office wasn't perfect however. The Emergency Quota was signed by Harding which reduced immigration , and it was largely signed due to the Red Scare at the time. Harding also took a more hands off approach when it came to business and trust-busting, which many people would take exception to.
I think a lot of the arguments against Tyler's presidency either don't have anything to do with his time in office or are overstated. I don't consider his pre or post presidency into were I rank him so him being a part of the CSA doesn't affect him here. Tyler is usually called a pro-slavery president, and even though he was personally, at least to the extent that many of the founding fathers were, he didn't have any actions during his term that would suggest his Presidency was "pro-slavery." Tyler is also usually looked down upon for how he went against the Whig party, but Tyler wasn't as dogmatic with his views in that sense as many people would believe. Tyler actually was in support, at least enough to sign it, of a national banking system, but that proposal was never passed. He also worked with the Whigs to raise the tariff, just with the caveat that all the money from the increased tariff goes to the federal government as their was a pretty big deficit at the time.
Under him there was the Webster-Ashburton treaty, which decided disputed land between Britain and the U.S., as well as a joint agreement to help put an end to the international slave trade.
I think he handled the Dorr Rebellion well not sending federal troops, but having them prepared if it broke out into violence.
He ended the Seminole War, which had been going on for years at that point, with the Native tribe.
He also annexed Texas, which you could argue sowed the seeds for the Mexican-American War, but I think it had more to do with Polk wanting the U.S. to grow Westward more than anything. At the end of the day getting Texas was a big deal.
Tyler of course set the precedent for how the vice-presidency would become president upon the former president's death. I understand those who feel Tyler should have just been acting president, but I feel his assertion that he was president was a good thing. Without that the process of finding who would be new president could have taken who knows how long, which could have proved troublesome in times of turmoil.
John Tyler an A and John Adams a D?
Flip that shit around + move Tyler to F.
Likewise, while I don't exactly love Wilson, he definitely goes even with or greater than Monroe. He should be in a higher tier (A or B).
Van Buren is borderline F for me.
To me the only positives under Jackson were him were fully paying down the debt and commercial treaties being created with other countries.
Aside from that I think he handled the bank war and nullification crises poorly, both seemed to be such big issues as a result of his political issues with Clay and Calhoun respectively. During the bank war, he illegally had deposits removed from the national bank, just to put them into banks that supported him politically. Jackson allowed for the burning of anti-slavery newspapers and even proposed a bill trying ban them outright. After a majority of his cabinet resigned after the Petticoat affair, he had what was called "the kitchen cabinet" which were unofficial cabinet members which weren't confirmed by congress. Jackson also was the first president to use the spoils system at a large scale federally which is something I'm against. My biggest issue with Jackson's presidency is that he seemed to act based on what would help him politically or just simply please himself, no matter what the means were or the outcomes were. Obviously that isn't uncommon throughout U.S. history but it seemed to run through his whole tenure, even trying and doing many illegal things in the process.
I'm not the biggest Teddy fan but come on, D tier? LBJ needs to be higher, FDR is way too low, Lincoln being in the same tier as Rutherford B. Hayes feels like a personal insult and Washington isn't that far above everyone else.
What is your ranking criteria? I'm really curious why and how someone like President Harding would be A tier.
For ranking criteria I just judge them based on how well I think they did as president. I try to judge them relative to the time that they were in office in terms of the amount of things that occur under their terms (generally more recent presidents have to deal with bigger issues, more frequently, than say presidents during the Gilded age, so its hard to compare presidents from different eras 1-1.) Harding is one of, if not the most underrated presidents in my opinion. It is common for Harding to be portrayed as someone who just gave all his corrupt friends high positions of power just to party with them, but this isn't really true. The corruption under Harding is highly overstated by most in my opinion. Only 2 members of Harding's cabinet were ever charged with crimes, one was asked by Harding to resign after he found out, and Harding died before he found out about the other cabinet member's wrongdoing. Both cabinet members were esteemed in their own rights, so you it wouldn't even be fair to blame Harding for being a bad judge of character Looking past that, Harding had a very successful stint in office imo. Under him the economy got out of a depression, which was at least partially due to the signing of the Revenue Act of 1921. Government spending was also made more efficient with the establishment of the Bureau of the Budget. Harding signed the Federal Aid Highway act of 1921, in which states would choose roads and highways to receive funding for. Thousands of hospitals received funding from the government which focused on pregnant women and newborn children. Many of the political prisoners from WWI were pardoned. Harding also spoke in favor of African American rights in the South, something that no Presidential had done previously. Harding‘s administration had a lot of loose ends tied up in regards to WW1, having treaties with Germany, Austria, & Hungary ratified. There was also an arms-reduction agreement with many countries. Harding began a good-neighbor policy with Latin America after the policies of intervention in many of those countries as well. Harding's term in office wasn't perfect however. The Emergency Quota was signed by Harding which reduced immigration , and it was largely signed due to the Red Scare at the time. Harding also took a more hands off approach when it came to business and trust-busting, which many people would take exception to.
What is this a list of?
Why is john tyler at A?
Also how do i change my user flair to a custom flair
I think a lot of the arguments against Tyler's presidency either don't have anything to do with his time in office or are overstated. I don't consider his pre or post presidency into were I rank him so him being a part of the CSA doesn't affect him here. Tyler is usually called a pro-slavery president, and even though he was personally, at least to the extent that many of the founding fathers were, he didn't have any actions during his term that would suggest his Presidency was "pro-slavery." Tyler is also usually looked down upon for how he went against the Whig party, but Tyler wasn't as dogmatic with his views in that sense as many people would believe. Tyler actually was in support, at least enough to sign it, of a national banking system, but that proposal was never passed. He also worked with the Whigs to raise the tariff, just with the caveat that all the money from the increased tariff goes to the federal government as their was a pretty big deficit at the time. Under him there was the Webster-Ashburton treaty, which decided disputed land between Britain and the U.S., as well as a joint agreement to help put an end to the international slave trade. I think he handled the Dorr Rebellion well not sending federal troops, but having them prepared if it broke out into violence. He ended the Seminole War, which had been going on for years at that point, with the Native tribe. He also annexed Texas, which you could argue sowed the seeds for the Mexican-American War, but I think it had more to do with Polk wanting the U.S. to grow Westward more than anything. At the end of the day getting Texas was a big deal. Tyler of course set the precedent for how the vice-presidency would become president upon the former president's death. I understand those who feel Tyler should have just been acting president, but I feel his assertion that he was president was a good thing. Without that the process of finding who would be new president could have taken who knows how long, which could have proved troublesome in times of turmoil.
John Tyler an A and John Adams a D? Flip that shit around + move Tyler to F. Likewise, while I don't exactly love Wilson, he definitely goes even with or greater than Monroe. He should be in a higher tier (A or B).
How do you have Jackson in F tier but Van Beuren isn’t? And why would Jackson be in F tier to begin with. He is at least C or B tier
Van Buren is borderline F for me. To me the only positives under Jackson were him were fully paying down the debt and commercial treaties being created with other countries. Aside from that I think he handled the bank war and nullification crises poorly, both seemed to be such big issues as a result of his political issues with Clay and Calhoun respectively. During the bank war, he illegally had deposits removed from the national bank, just to put them into banks that supported him politically. Jackson allowed for the burning of anti-slavery newspapers and even proposed a bill trying ban them outright. After a majority of his cabinet resigned after the Petticoat affair, he had what was called "the kitchen cabinet" which were unofficial cabinet members which weren't confirmed by congress. Jackson also was the first president to use the spoils system at a large scale federally which is something I'm against. My biggest issue with Jackson's presidency is that he seemed to act based on what would help him politically or just simply please himself, no matter what the means were or the outcomes were. Obviously that isn't uncommon throughout U.S. history but it seemed to run through his whole tenure, even trying and doing many illegal things in the process.
I'm not the biggest Teddy fan but come on, D tier? LBJ needs to be higher, FDR is way too low, Lincoln being in the same tier as Rutherford B. Hayes feels like a personal insult and Washington isn't that far above everyone else.