Talk:Historical rankings of presidents of the United States

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Historical rankings of presidents of the United States article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 3 months

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion on 9 February 2008. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

United States: Presidents / Government / History Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as Low-importance).

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

War mongers on the top of the list

the list of those presidents placed on the top are more of blood thirsty war initiators.

The question is who paid the polls to make such a bias towards wars? 2001:8F8:1661:FAFF:8C75:4250:CD94:8A61 (talk) 09:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I question your assessment based on the overall 2022 Siena College rankings.

Regarding the top twelve:

The US only went to war under Franklyn D. Roosevelt after it was attacked by Japan.
There were no significant conflicts under the Washington, Jefferson, Madison, or Obama administrations.
Aside from the end of the Korean War with the October 1953 armistice, a war that started under Truman, there was no major war under the Eisenhower administration, although there were covert actionss in the Congo, Guatemala, Iran, & Iraq.
The Kennedy administration had no involvement in any major wars, although there were many conflicts. See Foreign policy of the John F. Kennedy administration.
The Lincoln, Madison, Truman, & Johnson each had significant wars that started under them.

Of other presidents that had significant wars or conflicts, the overall 2022 Siena College rating has Wilson at 13, Polk at 15, McKinley at 22nd, Nixon at 28, & George W. Bush at 35th.

Since only a third of the top twelve ranked had initiated wars in which a foreign power did not start the wary, your assertion that those presidents placed on the top are more of blood thirsty war initiators seems faulty. Furthermore, your comment seems to violate the WP:OR, WP:NPOV, MOS:CONTENTIOUS, & WP:FORUM policies & guidelines. Peaceray (talk) 18:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even the Democratic Party community despises Andrew Jackson, no many people can say anything good about him, and he can still be ranked in the middle upper.Cbls1911 (talk) 13:26, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

45/47 edit?

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Should we change the 45 to 45/47 for Trump's numbering and add a footnote/edit the Cleveland footnote? NoLongerBreathedIn (talk) 14:05, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Shadow311 (talk) 21:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that a ranking performed at a specific point in time should include not only just those presidents that existed as of then, but also only what was known of them at the time. So rankings before now should only refer to 45. Future rankings that occur during or after the term of the 47th president, and take into account his performance during that term alongside his performance as the 45th president, could be referenced as 45/47. P.S. Apologies for not logging in; I can't remember my password and I'm not getting the reset email either. 2600:4809:C054:3700:E921:773:646C:915F (talk) 03:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about historical rankings, and the second Trump presidency isn't historical, it isn't even present-day yet. We need to wait and see how historians view the second term. If it's as much of a train-wreck as the first term, we would treat it the same way as we do Grover Cleveland. There is, however, a possibility that lessons learned during the first term might result in an effective second term presidency, in which case historians would rank the second term differently and then so should we. It's too soon to make such a decision. Either way, we shouldn't label it 45/47 because that implies a historian viewpoint that hasn't happened yet. Check back in 4 years. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your super interesting political views. Nobody asked, and it wasn't relevant, but you provided them anyway. Thanks! 2601:201:8C01:E2F0:B98B:FC79:B30E:BB72 (talk) 12:45, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found ~Anachronist's comment much more relevant than 2601:201:8C01:E2F0:B98B:FC79:B30E:BB72's dismissive opinion. Peaceray (talk) 17:29, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anon, I didn't state any political views. You demonstrated clearly that you have absolutely no clue what my political views are. What I wrote basically summarized the consensus view among historians, and that's all we are concerned about in this article. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:05, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As long as the rankings for Trump are for 45, that's the label we should use. Once we have rankings for him as 47, then we can change the label. — kwami (talk) 02:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obama

Obama is consistently ranked top 3 My tightness (talk) 18:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://time.com/2949984/barack-obama-poll/ "More Americans consider Barack Obama to be the worst President since World War II than they do any other president" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.54.226.59 (talk) 03:16, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Non-scientific popularity polls are irrelevant, especially when those who answer are likely ignorant of the historical significance of all presidents since this country's inception. We are concerned with historical rankings by actual historians, not man-on-the-street views of only recent administrations. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:11, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trump?

when are we having trump to the ratings WHAT WILL SATISFY YOU (talk) 15:00, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He is. But just like Grover Cleveland the other president with 2 non-consecutive terms he is listed at his first spot, ie before Biden as 45/47th president.Arnoutf (talk) 17:25, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Arnoutf Thank you! WHAT WILL SATISFY YOU (talk) 11:29, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Racist president page

Why are the only two studies listed far left. Surely there are more balanced scales. I believe Abe was morally opposed to slavery and segregation since his teen years. Not to be a political crazy, but I think the two studies (book + study) are unreliable. GreaterTree (talk) 05:56, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]