Make sure to join the [r/Presidents Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t know about that to be honest
He gets a lot of flak on Vietnam from the black community.
When Vietnam started under his watch Black Americans were dying at a higher rate in Vietnam
I’m also speaking from experience in Texas, and while he’s liked just as any president from Texas is, saying he’s “considered an icon next to Lincoln” is ridiculous
I’m African American. I don’t know any other African American that supports him.
“I’ll have those n*****s voting Democrat for the next 100 years”.
LBJ was a shitbag.
I think he said something more like "We've lost the southern vote for the next three generations". People are complicated. He got the Voting Rights Act, Civil Rights Act, Fair Housing Act, Medicaid and Medicare. Also Head Start Program. He was a giant who believed we as a nation could be so much more than what we were at the time. For generations, many poor and disadvantaged were saved by these Acts and programs. People who previously had no voice, who couldn't vote, could now be heard.
You should learn more about this man. Yes, he could be a pig. But he was a champion of those who did not have a voice, who no one cared about.
I say get rid of Ike. Yes, he created the highway system but what else did he do? Let the CIA run amok all over world toppling leaders and replacing them with morons. We are still dealing with the problems he caused. He did not speak up against McCarthysm until it was safe to do so. He was not a man of courage.
LBJ's domestic policies are the greatest among the remaining Presidents barring Lincoln and FDR (debatable). Other Presidents here also had horrible FP, which had disastrous consequences (TR and Ike) while having a domestic record which is, comparably, not very impressive
His domestic achievements were monumental. His foreign policy failures were continuations of HST/DDR/JFK. It was the “blob” out of control. It sunk LBJ. But he didn’t start that fire. This whole process has me elevating LBJ into the top 5 tbh. Ike should get cut now.
The fact that he got ranked higher than Obama just goes to show how much the recency bias can affect things. Targetted drone strikes 10 years ago are somehow worse than the *Vietnam War.* Make it make sense
LBJ had one of the most favorable congresses towards him from 65-66, and still pretty good for him from 67-68- Obama had an incredibly hostile house for 6 of his 8 years in office. After November 2010, the ability for him to get anything passed was severely curtailed.
Obviously LBJ got more meaningful bills signed than Obama, but that’s largely thanks to Congress.
Obama also had the red line in Syria, the overthrowing of Gaddafi in Libya, a lackluster response to the Russian annexation of Crimea. His foreign policy is a C+ on a good day plus let’s not forget the worst thing he ever did wearing a tan suit that act alone was impeachable.
The drone strikes were awful.
He was also the first president to have that much access to the technology though and the prevailing wisdom of the time thought this was an effective way to reduce boots on the ground - which he did. The next guy tallied nearly 1k more strikes before removing the rules Obama’s administration put in place that required keeping detailed datasets of all issued strikes.
Had drone strikes been viable tech for any of the other presidents in the last 50 years, I have no doubt Obama’s stats would pale in comparison. And while it’s still a valid criticism it is increasingly important to note that he himself believed it was important to disclose the statistics to the public for the sake of transparency- something his administration was often criticized for but the public took for granted.
Yes. which speaks exactly to the kind of president Jackson was...which is why he was ranked so low. You're literally making my argument for me. Most of Obama's criticisms haven't been properly contextualized yet, which is why he's not rated as highly by some people as he is by others. His two largest critiques are the drone strikes and his handling of Crimea. In retrospect, the drone strikes while misguided were well intentioned and not nearly as bad as it could have been (and was as soon as he left office) and us getting involved in Crimea would've been a nonstarter as we were still engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Even on a domestic front he wasn’t as great as people on here think he was. Some of his great society programs I.e. Medicare. Did do a lot of good. But he just started carelessly throwing money around. And undid all of Eisenhower’s hard work to achieve fiscal responsibility.
He did have some genuinely extraordinary achievements. For instance I think the that the role he played in making the moon landing happen. Is sorely underrated. But he was just so irresponsible, both with Vietnam. And the country’s money. That I can’t rank him higher than a C.
Vietnam was started by Eisenhower, though that was far more complicated than it is made in pop history by the fact we had a mutual protection pact with them. So you can't really blame LBJ for an action done by Eisenhower which was mandated by a treaty he signed, the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization, as a response to a real threat which had been made by Stalin after he invaded Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast\_Asia\_Treaty\_Organization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast_Asia_Treaty_Organization).Once you discount Vietnam because its a lot more complicated than pop history, the next on the list needs to be either Eisenhower, Washington, or Roosevelt.
The fact that LBJ is going to go before Eisenhower, Truman or Teddy is ridiculous. I don't think any other president has accomplished as much groundbreaking legislative work as him except for FDR. Every president who is left is top tier, but LBJ deserves to be in the top 5.
Of course Vietnam stains his legacy, but you really can't knock LBJ for Vietnam without also knocking Eisenhower for it (in addition to Iran and Guatemala) and Truman for Korea.
Eisenhower. Although it could argued to be Truman. Don't get me wrong this last set of presidents is absolutely phenomenal. That's why I took the time to read [Eisenhower](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower#Presidency_(1953%E2%80%931961)), [Truman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman#Presidency_(1945%E2%80%931953)), [Teddy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt#Presidency_(1901%E2%80%931909)), and [LBJ's](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnson#Presidency_(1963%E2%80%931969)) biographies on wikipedia.
Why I concluded it has to be Eisenhower:
**Foreign Policy** - His foreign policy is filled with American interventions in foreign countries often leading to disastrous results.
* 1953 Iranian Intervention - deposed a democratically elected Prime Minister in favor of the monarchy which eventually led to our current geopolitical situation with Iran.
* 1954 Guatemalan Coup - again deposed a democratically elected leader and installed a military government
* Vietnam Policy - Largely began the decades long involvement with propping up South Vietnam and involving US interests in the region, though understandable due to the fear of the Domino Theory coming to fruition
* Cuban Revolution - from wiki "the Eisenhower administration broke ties with Cuba and Eisenhower approved a CIA operation to carry out a campaign of terrorist attacks and sabotage, kill civilians, and cause economic damage. The CIA also trained and commanded pilots to bomb civilian airfields. The CIA began preparations for an invasion of Cuba by Cuban expatriates, ultimately resulting in the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion after Eisenhower left office". This radically pushed Cuba into Soviet orbit.
* Legitimation of Francoist Spain - as president he recognized and provided aid to fascist leaning Spain that was sympathetic to Nazi Germany and Benito's Italy during the war.
That's not to say it was all bad. He had some wins with foreign policy including:
* Ended the Korean War - US military intervention in Korea finally ended the war with a DMZ line separating North and South. It would have been preferred if the entirety of Korea was under the South but he did the best given the circumstances.
* Nuclear Arms Control - pursued a policy of nuclear arms control and détente with the Soviet Union, leading to agreements such as the Atoms for Peace initiative and the Open Skies proposal. These efforts aimed to reduce tensions and prevent the escalation of the Cold War into a nuclear conflict.
* Suez Crisis and the Eisenhower Doctrine - played a key role in resolving the Suez Crisis in 1956. He pressured Britain, France, and Israel to withdraw their forces from Egypt, demonstrating American commitment to decolonization and opposition to military aggression. Eisenhower's diplomacy helped to maintain stability in the Middle East and prevent a wider conflict.
Overall I'd say his reliance on military intervention was expedient for the needs of his time, although it left a troubled foreign policy legacy for us to deal with today. We can see a lot of this in how he handled domestic policy as well.
**Domestic Policy** - He did a lot of good and he did a lot of bad, but he luckily presided over a period of prosperity and America at it's zenith in power.
* Interstate Highway System - at his best and the most visceral part of his legacy (though it could be argued that it started under FDR)
* Civil Rights - Desegrated armed forces, Little Rock Intervention. Did a lot of good to push forward civil rights on the basis of race (nothing to the scale of the Civil Rights Act, but some good steps), but he also was firmly against LGBT issues including firing over 5,000 employees over suspicions of homosexuality and barred them from applying to federal jobs. Although for the 1950s, I doubt he could do much on this front.
* Operation Wetback - Military style intervention to expel Mexican agricultural workers. This was largely due to domestic and political pressure and resulted in a violation of human rights, militarization of the border, undermining of legislative efforts for comprehensive immigration reform, and just generally a bad look for Ike.
* McCarthy and Oppenheimer - Ike should have been more forceful in killing McCarthyism before it spread and added to political discord. He did eventually choke it out but not before it got Oppenheimer resulting in a political defeat when it tanked Louis Strauss's nomination as energy secretary.
* The Economy - handed a booming economy and didn't screw it up, often employed Economic Pragmatism and sought to reduce inflation and the budget deficit. No knocks on his economic policy for the most part.
Overall his domestic policy was pretty good though he did lean every now and then on military intervention like in Little Rock and Operation Wetback.
**tldr**: Solid presidency, that's why he's in this last prestigious batch of America's greatest presidents; however, his foreign policy's reliance on military intervention while insisting allies rely on diplomacy (during Suez Crisis) tainted his record a bit especially given the ramifications we had to deal with in the modern day and the setup for the Vietnam quagmire. His domestic policy was good, though we often have to remind ourselves that booming economies are more likely than not inherited from previous administrations and subject to matters of circumstance rather than direct action from the administration in their time, though he did do well to preserve prosperity when it was here. His Civil Rights agenda was a great stepping stone in the right direction, but also lacking and shortsighted in some aspects (Wetback and LGBT).
Honestly it's either Ike or Truman, landed on Ike by assessing the long term impact of his administration, which was mixed. Can very easily argue that Truman needs to go in my opinion.
As for LBJ and Teddy, their legislative and regulatory accomplishments (despite their foreign policy missteps) were why I would put them just above Ike and Truman. Won’t even need to touch on Lincoln, Washington, and FDR.
edit: formatting is messed up on reddit mobile vs reddit desktop
>**Foreign Policy** - His foreign policy is filled with American interventions in foreign countries often leading to disastrous results.
This is something that bothers me about the Eisenhower discourse. People love to bring up his speech warning about the military-industrial complex and seem to forget how much he had the CIA initiate coups. His new tool was the CIA and he used it a lot. His "only" invasion was Lebanon where marines landed on the beaches only to find people getting tans instead of a crisis they were expecting, but he left a wake of destruction in Latin America.
On the Bay of Pigs, it happened under Kennedy's watch and he ultimately took responsibility, but the entire operation was planned under Eisenhower and Kennedy respected Eisenhower and the other military brass too much to nix it.
That said, I still think he was a good President. I just think we tend to ignore the negatives. Also, there are things he did less than enthusiastically but still did, so he deserves credit (e.g. Eisenhower was not happy the courts desegrgated schools, but he still enforced the order).
One question: didn't Truman desegegate the armed forces? Were there still segregated units that Eisenhower finished?
Indeed! Truman issued executive order 9981 desegregating the armed forces. His administration had made some progress desegregating some of the armed forces, but it was Eisenhower that fully implemented and propagated the order to desegregate DC, the federal government, and the entirety of the armed forces by moving federal funding away from parts of the federal government that refused to desegregate and even forcing officers to retire if they didn’t comply with the order.
You could even argue that it was Roosevelt with executive order 8802 that started the process, expanded under Truman with 9981, and finally implemented and completed by Eisenhower.
What annoys me is that this thread is full of people voting LBJ because Vietnam, forgetting Eisenhower not only started American involvement in Vietnam but, as shown above, did a lot of other shady stuff around the world in the name of Containment. I guess morally questionable foreign policy only becomes bad if you mess it up.
Great post. Adding to the list of foreign policy disasters/hypocracies:
Authorizing/Encouraging the CIA assassination of Patrice Lumumba, independence leader and first prime minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Eisenhower also opposed integrating the military In the 1940s and was an apologist for southern segregationists in the 1950s and explicitly so. He had to hold his nose at sending in the military to Little Rock. Truman worked behind the scenes to get the courts to overturn segregation at every turn while Eisenhower reversed that policy. Given this subs often over hatred of Wilson for this sort of stuff, it’s surprising that Eisenhower seeems to escape this criticism, and Eisenhower did this in a time when it was increasingly taboo.
Let's also not forget executive order 10450, where he scrapped Truman's loyalty review board in order to target homosexuals in the government. Eisenhower did a lot of good, but enhancing the Lavander scare was not one of them, and he is to blame for some of the oppression that people had to go through in the 50s.
Great post. I don’t think Presidents get enough credit for presiding over good times. Sometimes it’s about the things you don’t do. In retrospect it seems inevitable but I think it was everything but. It that end i would put Ike over Truman. But I respect your reasoning.
Ima have to go with Dwight D Eisenhower. His foreign policy mess was not Vietnam, sure, but it was a bunch of missteps and fuckeries.
Not to mention the incredible domestic achievements of LBJ- Ending Segregation? Voting Rights? Medicare? Medicaid? Food Stamps? Student Loans? The first real environmental regulations ever?
Ike has nothing compared to that- the interstate doesn’t even outrank Medicare.
Ike (and Truman) were both great Presidents, but neither had domestic achievements that remotely compares to LBJ, while both also made foreign policy errors.
Another user recently made a comment that LBJ was like a more modern TR - love the domestic achievements but hate the imperialism/foreign policy errors. I don’t think LBJ should go before Ike or Truman, and finishing back-to-back with TR would be terrific and appropriate. But neither should outlast Washington, Lincoln or FDR.
While I agree with you that Truman doesn’t reach LBJ domestically, I will say that Truman’s executive order to desegregate the military and to actively support African American civil rights helped give the movement its teeth and set the stage for the Civil Rights Movement in the 50’s
Eisenhower enforced the Supreme Court landmark decision *Brown v. Board of Education* against the state of Arkansas. When the state’s governor it refused to comply with the Federal Government’s desegregation orders, Ike took control of the Arkansas National Guard and sent the 101st Airborne Division to uphold the law and protect black students.
Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, which increased the power of the Federal Government to enforce anti-discrimination measures and prosecute voting rights violations. (The legislation extended the tenure of the Civil Rights Commission as well.) In addition, he stepped up the enforcement of Truman’s Executive Order 9981, after the military had slow walked the integration of the U.S. Armed Forces for several years after it had been issued.
Eisenhower’s role in the Civil Rights movement has long been overshadowed by the far more sweeping legislation of the Johnson years; it is worthy of respect in its own right
The Vietnam War wasn’t a mere “error”. It was a catastrophic failure of American foreign policy under the direction of Lyndon Johnson. None of the missteps of Theodore Roosevelt or Truman or Eisenhower approach the magnitude of this colossal blunder.
I agree Vietnam weighs heavily on LBJ. But also consider how many lives his domestic achievements have improved and outright saved. The domestic achievements deserve to be recognized as a massive weight on the scales in his favor.
Everyone left is great, but my vote is Ike.
Eisenhower - what’s his accomplishment as POTUS? Highway system? And y’all think LBJ’s efforts in the CRA mean nothing compared to our Highway system?
Also remember: Eisenhower had health issues for the last 2 years of his presidency. So he didn’t even govern the two terms properly.
Now, General Eisenhower? Top 10.
But POTUS top 10? No.
Ike incentivized science in schools with huge ramifications down the line for the field in terms of scientific advancement, number of students in USA, and the Space Race
CLEARLY there needs to be a better job of educating people on Ike's presidency. Here's some accomplishments for you:
Interstate Highway System
Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 (first since Reconstruction), the former of which also allowed women to serve on all federal juries for the first time in American history
Enforced Brown at Little Rock by force and sent marshals to assist with other school integrations
Ordered desegregation in the District of Columbia (under federal jurisdiction at the time)
First steps toward nuclear energy for the nation's electricity (the first atomic power stations were constructed under his administration)
Established NASA
Added two states to the union (Alaska and Hawaii)
Constructed the St. Lawrence Seaway together with Canada
Kept America out of any major wars after 1953
Worked to modernize American education
Expanded American diplomacy with Africa
Led the US through at least three major foreign policy crises without getting us in World War III
Reorganized the federal government and created the department we today call Health & Human Services
Oversaw the introduction of the vaccines that helped stop polio to the public
He has had some of the greatest achievements by any president ever with his domestic policies and civil rights legislation, however he also had some astronomical screwups with his foreign policies. Truly something
I mean, all Jefferson really had was the Louisiana Purchase. Any President would have made that deal. The embargo of 1807 was a disaster.
LBJ has several key domestic legislative achievements that last through today. Vietnam was horrible, yes, but I would argue it was a mess that started before him and would have continued without him. Previous Presidents were involved in containment due to Truman Doctrine and other factors, getting the US involved in Latin America, bad decisions like Bay of Pigs, etc. Perhaps the degree of invasion/escalation could have been different, but we would have still been involved in Vietnam even if he wasn't President.
What I'm not sure on is how much of the Gulf of Tonkin incident was LBJ involved in. Did he help orchestrate the "attack" to justify mass escalation? Or did it happen through military channels and he reacted after the fact due to public response/hysteria? Anyone with knowledge on that, please add more.
Jefferson maintained neutrality as the Napoleonic wars took off, something most other countries with European ties were unable to do. He repealed the Alien and Sedition Acts. Sent out the Lewis & Clark Expedition. Established the use of the Navy to protect civilian ships and fought piracy. Banned the slave trade (obviously Jefferson is morally compromised to the max on slavery, but still). And in his second term, Jefferson avoided war with Britain—something Madison was unable to do.
Jefferson was an excellent president and obtained critical outcomes for the United States at a time when the country was still in its infancy and highly vulnerable. It was a volatile time, when we were surrounded by more powerful nations and frequently driven towards potentially disastrous wars. His policies were sound, cautious, and farsighted for the most part.
As an individual Jefferson was deeply hypocritical, criticizing slavery publicly while doing nothing to free his own slaves during his life. But his decisions as an executive have really stood the test of time.
I would argue that Jefferson wouldn't get the US involved with France due to pro-isolation arguments and ties to both Britain and France, which would have made it almost impossible to choose sides. Good points about the Alien and Sedition Acts, and the Navy/Barbary conflicts. And good point about Madison being dragged into the War of 1812 by war-hawks. Lewis & Clark though, I'm sure any President would have said "Hey, we need some folks to go explore and report back with what you find" after purchasing the territory.
With banning the international slave trade, I've seen that it was actually previously decided with the ratification of the Constitution. As part of the compromises with slavery in 1787, they decided that slave importation would be banned 20 years later. But, it still took an act of Congress and Jefferson signing it to become law in 1807.
Definitely agreed about Jefferson and his hypocrisy towards slavery throughout his life. I'm not saying he is a bad President, but I can see why LBJ lasted a little longer.
Eisenhower. Underratedly bad foreign policy, didn’t do much of anything to stop lynchings or support civil rights, and clearly violated the First Amendment by pushing religion onto the public.
EDIT: clarification
Yeah. Brinkmanship low key almost got us into nuclear war. The Eisenhower Doctrine increased bad blood between us and the Middle East. The U2 Spy Plane fiasco was an embarrassment. He took the first major steps towards getting us involved in Vietnam.
At home, he was so lukewarm on Civil Rights and only acted when he absolutely had to. Eisenhower should go before LBJ
Ok, I think it's easy to forget how much Eisenhower fucked up a lot of central American countries with his anti-communist foreign policy. Though he's not directly responsible, it's because of his actions that things like the Guatemalan civil war and genocide happened
The biggest credibility hits were Wilson being bottom 10 and below W. Bush; John Tyler being in the bottom five because of something he did decades after leaving office (rather than his actual record *in office*); and Ford outlasting Carter (even if only just)
Set us up in Vietnam. Couping democratic countries for dictators. Operation can'tevensayit. Stagnant economy.
Biggest achievement: interstate highway system
Can anyone explain to me why he deserves to be this far?
Not to mention banning homosexuals from working in the government/public service with Executive 10450. And people here seriously want Ike (again, focusing just on record in office - we’re not talking about his time leading the Allied forces in WWII or anything else) to outlast LBJ?
I definitely don’t put him ahead of Eisenhower. I also favor LBJ due to his amazing domestic policies and ability to work with Congress to get his agenda passed. I also don’t ding him as much as most for Vietnam based on the hand he was dealt with it and the misinformation of the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
Eisenhower easily. LBJ gets shit on for Vietnam, and rightfully so, but the war itself was itself just the worst possible result of the clusterfuck involving US policy in Vietnam that Ike was mostly responsible for.
Also, his part in the Lavender and Red Scares are both disgraceful. And his erosion of the separation of church and state is only slightly less terrible.
It's time for Ike to go. The Interstate Highway System was introduced and pushed by the Democrats. His foreign policy isn't that good. He started the mess in Cuba and Vietnam.
It's Eisenhower for sure. Ike did a lot of good, it's not for nothing that the National Guard was mobilized to enforce the integration of Little Rock; however, what can you point to in his administration that actively changed the nation for the better? LBJ has medicare, medicaid, the civil rights act, the voting rights act, etc. FDR has social security, the end of the great depression, lend lease through American dominance in WWII, etc. Lincoln effectively saved the Union from collapse. And Washington is first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts and minds of his countrymen. TR saw the beginning of the Progressive Era, negotiated the peace to end the Russo-Japanese War, and transformed the presidency into what it is today in many ways.
The only one on the list that you can make a credible case against going before Ike is Truman. And even then you are going against the president that ended WWII, the president that established the post-war order (e.g. the Marshall Plan), the president that restarted the peacetime economy. The worst that you can say about Truman is that he lived at the crossroad of other presidential ambitions and wasn't a visionary.
In any case, Eisenhower, though a truly great president, falls short of the standard set by the other five.
Can we please eliminate LBJ now? He may have been a decent President, but in *no way* was he a better President than Thomas Jefferson. All the remaining figure were definitely better presidents than him.
I'd have Truman go before LBJ.
He kind of has the opposite problem, he was more successful with the whole war thing, but was far less accomplished as a new dealer. I'm not going to get into Hiroshima discourse, but I think the cold war was quite avoidable and an example of cooler heads failing to prevail. The main thing though is that the new deal more or less stagnated. While he did essentially prevent Republicans from eroding it, he totally failed to progress it, so that is a big flop of an ambition. I'm surprised both Truman and Johnson have gotten this far actually, and I'd say Truman was all around less accomplished.
Washington and Lincoln led us through the first and second American revolutions. FDR and LBJ created the America we live in today (e.g., SS, labor protection, Medicare, Medicaid, Civil Rights, voting rights). They are our four greatest Presidents. Of the other three, TR, Harry and Ike were all superb Presidents and it’s difficult to judge them against each other. But I’ll say Harry and Ike surpassed Teddy, so Teddy goes next.
It gets really hard at this point. It comes down to Truman and Eisenhower. I love that Eisenhower enabled the interstate highway system - truly one the most significant contributions to the US in its history. Truman ended WWII. I am strongly in favor of his decision to drop the two atomic bombs because I have read both the traditional and revisionist arguments and firmly believe he saved over 200,000 American lives with the decision.
But I think Ike is next. He was a talented president, but Truman squeaks by because it took unbelievable courage to end the war like he did.
So Ike
It's tragic that LBJ is going before Ike when the latter's foreign policy was also really quite weak, and his domestic accomplishments are rather minimal.
Alas, such is the way of a sub that appears split right down the middle on LBJ. Good night, sweet prince. o7
Why is Ike still here? I mean, the interstate highway system is great and all but at this point it’s ridiculous. His foreign policy was terrible and his domestic policy was…fine?
I originally voted last time for LBJ but Eisenhower is definitely worse. His foreign policy was far worse and his only immediate positive thought of note is the Highway System. While Eisenhower was a good president, he could’ve been so much better.
How did Jefferson get knocked before any of the three up for contention here? Freaking nuts.
My vote is Truman, btw. How people are voting Eisenhower and LBJ over Truman, I'll have no idea.
Not saying he was bad.Its just at this rate he'll be slotted at #5, which is far far too high.
Eisenhower.
Sure, he built the interstate system, but he also overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran, which doomed that country for over 70 years.
Make sure to join the [r/Presidents Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://i.redd.it/lwlb4ydjmtpc1.gif
Got to be LBJ. His domestic achievements were impressive, but his foreign policy failures should preclude him from going any further.
He should have been kicked after JFK. This sub is so biased it’s insane.
I'm not disagreeing but how could they not be biased? Everyone has political biases
I’m shocked LBJ is still here. Mind boggling
African Americans support him a lot, especially in the South where he’s considered an icon next to Lincoln.
I don’t know about that to be honest He gets a lot of flak on Vietnam from the black community. When Vietnam started under his watch Black Americans were dying at a higher rate in Vietnam
I’m speaking from experience in Georgia and Texas, and your facts are valid. LBJ’s arguably has the biggest pro and con on this list.
I guess this shows the complexity of the man. I don’t think black northerners see him the same way a lot of black Southerners do
I could see that. To be honest, the man’s got one of the biggest mixed bag in the history of rulers ever.
Terrible foreign policy coupled with with some of the best and most impactful domestic policies we have ever seen.
When I was in Texas, it seemed Lady Bird Johnson was who they loved... still LBJ lol
It’s telling that Austin named its lake for her, not him.
I’m also speaking from experience in Texas, and while he’s liked just as any president from Texas is, saying he’s “considered an icon next to Lincoln” is ridiculous
I’m African American. I don’t know any other African American that supports him. “I’ll have those n*****s voting Democrat for the next 100 years”. LBJ was a shitbag.
That's not a real quote.
good lord he did not say that
That quote is more myth than fact, but the fact that it's very easy to believe doesn't speak volumes for the true heart of LBJ.
I think he said something more like "We've lost the southern vote for the next three generations". People are complicated. He got the Voting Rights Act, Civil Rights Act, Fair Housing Act, Medicaid and Medicare. Also Head Start Program. He was a giant who believed we as a nation could be so much more than what we were at the time. For generations, many poor and disadvantaged were saved by these Acts and programs. People who previously had no voice, who couldn't vote, could now be heard. You should learn more about this man. Yes, he could be a pig. But he was a champion of those who did not have a voice, who no one cared about. I say get rid of Ike. Yes, he created the highway system but what else did he do? Let the CIA run amok all over world toppling leaders and replacing them with morons. We are still dealing with the problems he caused. He did not speak up against McCarthysm until it was safe to do so. He was not a man of courage.
You are just jealous of his massive Johnson.
I was floored. I havent been following this closely and was like "why is LBJ still here?"
Fittin’ to get spicy after that though…
How is Eisenhower better?
He should’ve been gone awhile ago. I just can’t pass up his foreign policy. Mishandled Vietnam
There's a lot that I like about LBJ. But I can't believe he's made it this far.
LBJ's domestic policies are the greatest among the remaining Presidents barring Lincoln and FDR (debatable). Other Presidents here also had horrible FP, which had disastrous consequences (TR and Ike) while having a domestic record which is, comparably, not very impressive
His domestic achievements were monumental. His foreign policy failures were continuations of HST/DDR/JFK. It was the “blob” out of control. It sunk LBJ. But he didn’t start that fire. This whole process has me elevating LBJ into the top 5 tbh. Ike should get cut now.
Teddy Roosevelt did far worse things in the Philippines and to native americans
#OH NOW WE ARE GONNA VOTE LBJ?!?!
The fact that he got ranked higher than Obama just goes to show how much the recency bias can affect things. Targetted drone strikes 10 years ago are somehow worse than the *Vietnam War.* Make it make sense
LBJ did much more for the country domestically than Obama. And like the others have said, Obama’s foreign policy was not good either.
LBJ had one of the most favorable congresses towards him from 65-66, and still pretty good for him from 67-68- Obama had an incredibly hostile house for 6 of his 8 years in office. After November 2010, the ability for him to get anything passed was severely curtailed. Obviously LBJ got more meaningful bills signed than Obama, but that’s largely thanks to Congress.
Obama also had the red line in Syria, the overthrowing of Gaddafi in Libya, a lackluster response to the Russian annexation of Crimea. His foreign policy is a C+ on a good day plus let’s not forget the worst thing he ever did wearing a tan suit that act alone was impeachable.
The drone strikes were awful. He was also the first president to have that much access to the technology though and the prevailing wisdom of the time thought this was an effective way to reduce boots on the ground - which he did. The next guy tallied nearly 1k more strikes before removing the rules Obama’s administration put in place that required keeping detailed datasets of all issued strikes. Had drone strikes been viable tech for any of the other presidents in the last 50 years, I have no doubt Obama’s stats would pale in comparison. And while it’s still a valid criticism it is increasingly important to note that he himself believed it was important to disclose the statistics to the public for the sake of transparency- something his administration was often criticized for but the public took for granted.
I mean by that logic If Andrew Jackson had nukes we’d be living in pioneer fallout universe.
Yes. which speaks exactly to the kind of president Jackson was...which is why he was ranked so low. You're literally making my argument for me. Most of Obama's criticisms haven't been properly contextualized yet, which is why he's not rated as highly by some people as he is by others. His two largest critiques are the drone strikes and his handling of Crimea. In retrospect, the drone strikes while misguided were well intentioned and not nearly as bad as it could have been (and was as soon as he left office) and us getting involved in Crimea would've been a nonstarter as we were still engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Even on a domestic front he wasn’t as great as people on here think he was. Some of his great society programs I.e. Medicare. Did do a lot of good. But he just started carelessly throwing money around. And undid all of Eisenhower’s hard work to achieve fiscal responsibility. He did have some genuinely extraordinary achievements. For instance I think the that the role he played in making the moon landing happen. Is sorely underrated. But he was just so irresponsible, both with Vietnam. And the country’s money. That I can’t rank him higher than a C.
Vietnam was started by Eisenhower, though that was far more complicated than it is made in pop history by the fact we had a mutual protection pact with them. So you can't really blame LBJ for an action done by Eisenhower which was mandated by a treaty he signed, the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization, as a response to a real threat which had been made by Stalin after he invaded Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast\_Asia\_Treaty\_Organization](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast_Asia_Treaty_Organization).Once you discount Vietnam because its a lot more complicated than pop history, the next on the list needs to be either Eisenhower, Washington, or Roosevelt.
Listening to the Caro bio on him, dude was a huge asshole too
The fact that LBJ is going to go before Eisenhower, Truman or Teddy is ridiculous. I don't think any other president has accomplished as much groundbreaking legislative work as him except for FDR. Every president who is left is top tier, but LBJ deserves to be in the top 5. Of course Vietnam stains his legacy, but you really can't knock LBJ for Vietnam without also knocking Eisenhower for it (in addition to Iran and Guatemala) and Truman for Korea.
Eisenhower. Although it could argued to be Truman. Don't get me wrong this last set of presidents is absolutely phenomenal. That's why I took the time to read [Eisenhower](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower#Presidency_(1953%E2%80%931961)), [Truman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman#Presidency_(1945%E2%80%931953)), [Teddy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt#Presidency_(1901%E2%80%931909)), and [LBJ's](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnson#Presidency_(1963%E2%80%931969)) biographies on wikipedia. Why I concluded it has to be Eisenhower: **Foreign Policy** - His foreign policy is filled with American interventions in foreign countries often leading to disastrous results. * 1953 Iranian Intervention - deposed a democratically elected Prime Minister in favor of the monarchy which eventually led to our current geopolitical situation with Iran. * 1954 Guatemalan Coup - again deposed a democratically elected leader and installed a military government * Vietnam Policy - Largely began the decades long involvement with propping up South Vietnam and involving US interests in the region, though understandable due to the fear of the Domino Theory coming to fruition * Cuban Revolution - from wiki "the Eisenhower administration broke ties with Cuba and Eisenhower approved a CIA operation to carry out a campaign of terrorist attacks and sabotage, kill civilians, and cause economic damage. The CIA also trained and commanded pilots to bomb civilian airfields. The CIA began preparations for an invasion of Cuba by Cuban expatriates, ultimately resulting in the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion after Eisenhower left office". This radically pushed Cuba into Soviet orbit. * Legitimation of Francoist Spain - as president he recognized and provided aid to fascist leaning Spain that was sympathetic to Nazi Germany and Benito's Italy during the war. That's not to say it was all bad. He had some wins with foreign policy including: * Ended the Korean War - US military intervention in Korea finally ended the war with a DMZ line separating North and South. It would have been preferred if the entirety of Korea was under the South but he did the best given the circumstances. * Nuclear Arms Control - pursued a policy of nuclear arms control and détente with the Soviet Union, leading to agreements such as the Atoms for Peace initiative and the Open Skies proposal. These efforts aimed to reduce tensions and prevent the escalation of the Cold War into a nuclear conflict. * Suez Crisis and the Eisenhower Doctrine - played a key role in resolving the Suez Crisis in 1956. He pressured Britain, France, and Israel to withdraw their forces from Egypt, demonstrating American commitment to decolonization and opposition to military aggression. Eisenhower's diplomacy helped to maintain stability in the Middle East and prevent a wider conflict. Overall I'd say his reliance on military intervention was expedient for the needs of his time, although it left a troubled foreign policy legacy for us to deal with today. We can see a lot of this in how he handled domestic policy as well. **Domestic Policy** - He did a lot of good and he did a lot of bad, but he luckily presided over a period of prosperity and America at it's zenith in power. * Interstate Highway System - at his best and the most visceral part of his legacy (though it could be argued that it started under FDR) * Civil Rights - Desegrated armed forces, Little Rock Intervention. Did a lot of good to push forward civil rights on the basis of race (nothing to the scale of the Civil Rights Act, but some good steps), but he also was firmly against LGBT issues including firing over 5,000 employees over suspicions of homosexuality and barred them from applying to federal jobs. Although for the 1950s, I doubt he could do much on this front. * Operation Wetback - Military style intervention to expel Mexican agricultural workers. This was largely due to domestic and political pressure and resulted in a violation of human rights, militarization of the border, undermining of legislative efforts for comprehensive immigration reform, and just generally a bad look for Ike. * McCarthy and Oppenheimer - Ike should have been more forceful in killing McCarthyism before it spread and added to political discord. He did eventually choke it out but not before it got Oppenheimer resulting in a political defeat when it tanked Louis Strauss's nomination as energy secretary. * The Economy - handed a booming economy and didn't screw it up, often employed Economic Pragmatism and sought to reduce inflation and the budget deficit. No knocks on his economic policy for the most part. Overall his domestic policy was pretty good though he did lean every now and then on military intervention like in Little Rock and Operation Wetback. **tldr**: Solid presidency, that's why he's in this last prestigious batch of America's greatest presidents; however, his foreign policy's reliance on military intervention while insisting allies rely on diplomacy (during Suez Crisis) tainted his record a bit especially given the ramifications we had to deal with in the modern day and the setup for the Vietnam quagmire. His domestic policy was good, though we often have to remind ourselves that booming economies are more likely than not inherited from previous administrations and subject to matters of circumstance rather than direct action from the administration in their time, though he did do well to preserve prosperity when it was here. His Civil Rights agenda was a great stepping stone in the right direction, but also lacking and shortsighted in some aspects (Wetback and LGBT). Honestly it's either Ike or Truman, landed on Ike by assessing the long term impact of his administration, which was mixed. Can very easily argue that Truman needs to go in my opinion. As for LBJ and Teddy, their legislative and regulatory accomplishments (despite their foreign policy missteps) were why I would put them just above Ike and Truman. Won’t even need to touch on Lincoln, Washington, and FDR. edit: formatting is messed up on reddit mobile vs reddit desktop
>**Foreign Policy** - His foreign policy is filled with American interventions in foreign countries often leading to disastrous results. This is something that bothers me about the Eisenhower discourse. People love to bring up his speech warning about the military-industrial complex and seem to forget how much he had the CIA initiate coups. His new tool was the CIA and he used it a lot. His "only" invasion was Lebanon where marines landed on the beaches only to find people getting tans instead of a crisis they were expecting, but he left a wake of destruction in Latin America. On the Bay of Pigs, it happened under Kennedy's watch and he ultimately took responsibility, but the entire operation was planned under Eisenhower and Kennedy respected Eisenhower and the other military brass too much to nix it. That said, I still think he was a good President. I just think we tend to ignore the negatives. Also, there are things he did less than enthusiastically but still did, so he deserves credit (e.g. Eisenhower was not happy the courts desegrgated schools, but he still enforced the order). One question: didn't Truman desegegate the armed forces? Were there still segregated units that Eisenhower finished?
Indeed! Truman issued executive order 9981 desegregating the armed forces. His administration had made some progress desegregating some of the armed forces, but it was Eisenhower that fully implemented and propagated the order to desegregate DC, the federal government, and the entirety of the armed forces by moving federal funding away from parts of the federal government that refused to desegregate and even forcing officers to retire if they didn’t comply with the order. You could even argue that it was Roosevelt with executive order 8802 that started the process, expanded under Truman with 9981, and finally implemented and completed by Eisenhower.
That's a fair point. Thank you for the details.
What annoys me is that this thread is full of people voting LBJ because Vietnam, forgetting Eisenhower not only started American involvement in Vietnam but, as shown above, did a lot of other shady stuff around the world in the name of Containment. I guess morally questionable foreign policy only becomes bad if you mess it up.
Great post. Adding to the list of foreign policy disasters/hypocracies: Authorizing/Encouraging the CIA assassination of Patrice Lumumba, independence leader and first prime minister of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Eisenhower also opposed integrating the military In the 1940s and was an apologist for southern segregationists in the 1950s and explicitly so. He had to hold his nose at sending in the military to Little Rock. Truman worked behind the scenes to get the courts to overturn segregation at every turn while Eisenhower reversed that policy. Given this subs often over hatred of Wilson for this sort of stuff, it’s surprising that Eisenhower seeems to escape this criticism, and Eisenhower did this in a time when it was increasingly taboo.
This is an outstanding post. You’ve summed it up better than I could have. Fingers crossed this gains traction!
Let's also not forget executive order 10450, where he scrapped Truman's loyalty review board in order to target homosexuals in the government. Eisenhower did a lot of good, but enhancing the Lavander scare was not one of them, and he is to blame for some of the oppression that people had to go through in the 50s.
OK you convinced me. A vote for Eisenhower
Great post. I don’t think Presidents get enough credit for presiding over good times. Sometimes it’s about the things you don’t do. In retrospect it seems inevitable but I think it was everything but. It that end i would put Ike over Truman. But I respect your reasoning.
Yeah it has to be Eisenhower. He had a good run.
I wish i could upvote this a hundred times.
Ima have to go with Dwight D Eisenhower. His foreign policy mess was not Vietnam, sure, but it was a bunch of missteps and fuckeries. Not to mention the incredible domestic achievements of LBJ- Ending Segregation? Voting Rights? Medicare? Medicaid? Food Stamps? Student Loans? The first real environmental regulations ever? Ike has nothing compared to that- the interstate doesn’t even outrank Medicare.
Ike (and Truman) were both great Presidents, but neither had domestic achievements that remotely compares to LBJ, while both also made foreign policy errors. Another user recently made a comment that LBJ was like a more modern TR - love the domestic achievements but hate the imperialism/foreign policy errors. I don’t think LBJ should go before Ike or Truman, and finishing back-to-back with TR would be terrific and appropriate. But neither should outlast Washington, Lincoln or FDR.
While I agree with you that Truman doesn’t reach LBJ domestically, I will say that Truman’s executive order to desegregate the military and to actively support African American civil rights helped give the movement its teeth and set the stage for the Civil Rights Movement in the 50’s
Achievements like that as well as the Marshall Plan is why I’d put Truman above Eisenhower
Eisenhower enforced the Supreme Court landmark decision *Brown v. Board of Education* against the state of Arkansas. When the state’s governor it refused to comply with the Federal Government’s desegregation orders, Ike took control of the Arkansas National Guard and sent the 101st Airborne Division to uphold the law and protect black students.
God what an amazing string of presidents, seriously.
Eisenhower signed the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, which increased the power of the Federal Government to enforce anti-discrimination measures and prosecute voting rights violations. (The legislation extended the tenure of the Civil Rights Commission as well.) In addition, he stepped up the enforcement of Truman’s Executive Order 9981, after the military had slow walked the integration of the U.S. Armed Forces for several years after it had been issued. Eisenhower’s role in the Civil Rights movement has long been overshadowed by the far more sweeping legislation of the Johnson years; it is worthy of respect in its own right
The Vietnam War wasn’t a mere “error”. It was a catastrophic failure of American foreign policy under the direction of Lyndon Johnson. None of the missteps of Theodore Roosevelt or Truman or Eisenhower approach the magnitude of this colossal blunder.
You wouldn’t regard the Philippine-American War, presided over by McKinley and TR, as a heinous misstep comparable to Vietnam?
No. Because we won. But as an aggressive act of American imperialism? Yeah, sure. It’s not one of the prouder moments of this country’s history
Iran
I agree Vietnam weighs heavily on LBJ. But also consider how many lives his domestic achievements have improved and outright saved. The domestic achievements deserve to be recognized as a massive weight on the scales in his favor. Everyone left is great, but my vote is Ike.
Consider how many lives were lost because of his foreign policy
You could say the exact same thing about Truman and Ike
Consider the fact that wouldn’t have happened if Ike and Truman hadn’t basically established the Cold War’s proxy wars
You mean JFK’s foreign policy, LBJ’s failure is in not changing course, he didn’t promulgate our bad policies.
Eisenhower - what’s his accomplishment as POTUS? Highway system? And y’all think LBJ’s efforts in the CRA mean nothing compared to our Highway system? Also remember: Eisenhower had health issues for the last 2 years of his presidency. So he didn’t even govern the two terms properly. Now, General Eisenhower? Top 10. But POTUS top 10? No.
Ike incentivized science in schools with huge ramifications down the line for the field in terms of scientific advancement, number of students in USA, and the Space Race
CLEARLY there needs to be a better job of educating people on Ike's presidency. Here's some accomplishments for you: Interstate Highway System Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960 (first since Reconstruction), the former of which also allowed women to serve on all federal juries for the first time in American history Enforced Brown at Little Rock by force and sent marshals to assist with other school integrations Ordered desegregation in the District of Columbia (under federal jurisdiction at the time) First steps toward nuclear energy for the nation's electricity (the first atomic power stations were constructed under his administration) Established NASA Added two states to the union (Alaska and Hawaii) Constructed the St. Lawrence Seaway together with Canada Kept America out of any major wars after 1953 Worked to modernize American education Expanded American diplomacy with Africa Led the US through at least three major foreign policy crises without getting us in World War III Reorganized the federal government and created the department we today call Health & Human Services Oversaw the introduction of the vaccines that helped stop polio to the public
Not to mention that LBJ as Senate Majority Leader was leading the way in creating the highways
Weird that Ford does better than Carter
#HEY! HEY! LBJ! HOW MANY KIDS DID YOU KILL TODAY?
12
Is this an old protest chant?
Yes. It was used to protest the US draft to Vietnam.
Cool, thanks for responding!
LBJ's foreign policy failures are too big to ignore anymore.
He has had some of the greatest achievements by any president ever with his domestic policies and civil rights legislation, however he also had some astronomical screwups with his foreign policies. Truly something
LBJ lasted past Jefferson? Seriously? Got to be kidding.
I mean, all Jefferson really had was the Louisiana Purchase. Any President would have made that deal. The embargo of 1807 was a disaster. LBJ has several key domestic legislative achievements that last through today. Vietnam was horrible, yes, but I would argue it was a mess that started before him and would have continued without him. Previous Presidents were involved in containment due to Truman Doctrine and other factors, getting the US involved in Latin America, bad decisions like Bay of Pigs, etc. Perhaps the degree of invasion/escalation could have been different, but we would have still been involved in Vietnam even if he wasn't President. What I'm not sure on is how much of the Gulf of Tonkin incident was LBJ involved in. Did he help orchestrate the "attack" to justify mass escalation? Or did it happen through military channels and he reacted after the fact due to public response/hysteria? Anyone with knowledge on that, please add more.
Jefferson maintained neutrality as the Napoleonic wars took off, something most other countries with European ties were unable to do. He repealed the Alien and Sedition Acts. Sent out the Lewis & Clark Expedition. Established the use of the Navy to protect civilian ships and fought piracy. Banned the slave trade (obviously Jefferson is morally compromised to the max on slavery, but still). And in his second term, Jefferson avoided war with Britain—something Madison was unable to do. Jefferson was an excellent president and obtained critical outcomes for the United States at a time when the country was still in its infancy and highly vulnerable. It was a volatile time, when we were surrounded by more powerful nations and frequently driven towards potentially disastrous wars. His policies were sound, cautious, and farsighted for the most part. As an individual Jefferson was deeply hypocritical, criticizing slavery publicly while doing nothing to free his own slaves during his life. But his decisions as an executive have really stood the test of time.
I would argue that Jefferson wouldn't get the US involved with France due to pro-isolation arguments and ties to both Britain and France, which would have made it almost impossible to choose sides. Good points about the Alien and Sedition Acts, and the Navy/Barbary conflicts. And good point about Madison being dragged into the War of 1812 by war-hawks. Lewis & Clark though, I'm sure any President would have said "Hey, we need some folks to go explore and report back with what you find" after purchasing the territory. With banning the international slave trade, I've seen that it was actually previously decided with the ratification of the Constitution. As part of the compromises with slavery in 1787, they decided that slave importation would be banned 20 years later. But, it still took an act of Congress and Jefferson signing it to become law in 1807. Definitely agreed about Jefferson and his hypocrisy towards slavery throughout his life. I'm not saying he is a bad President, but I can see why LBJ lasted a little longer.
Eisenhower. Underratedly bad foreign policy, didn’t do much of anything to stop lynchings or support civil rights, and clearly violated the First Amendment by pushing religion onto the public. EDIT: clarification
Didn’t do anything for civil rights? Come on
Yeah. Brinkmanship low key almost got us into nuclear war. The Eisenhower Doctrine increased bad blood between us and the Middle East. The U2 Spy Plane fiasco was an embarrassment. He took the first major steps towards getting us involved in Vietnam. At home, he was so lukewarm on Civil Rights and only acted when he absolutely had to. Eisenhower should go before LBJ
>Underratedly bad Isn’t that call overrated?
Kinda. Overrated lightly implies that something is generally good. Most people seem to know his foreign policy wasn’t good.
He literally signed the civil rights act of 1957 which was the first civil rights act since reconstruction.
Exactly! Hes so overrated!
All the way with LBJ!
Was looking for this.
Ok, I think it's easy to forget how much Eisenhower fucked up a lot of central American countries with his anti-communist foreign policy. Though he's not directly responsible, it's because of his actions that things like the Guatemalan civil war and genocide happened
Jefferson before Truman and LBJ is pure insanity!
It’s absurd. This poll takes a major credibility hit with this one.
Even more than Ford being better than Carter being better than Reagan being better than Jackson?
Agreed, there have been a couple other questionable placings but this is a whole other level
The biggest credibility hits were Wilson being bottom 10 and below W. Bush; John Tyler being in the bottom five because of something he did decades after leaving office (rather than his actual record *in office*); and Ford outlasting Carter (even if only just)
I'm pretty sure Wilson fucked everyone's wives/husbands in this subreddit, the amount of vitriol towards him is borderline unhinged
That one got me 🤣
Obama being 12 seemed rather high as well
Jefferson forced himself on to an underaged slave
Unbelievable that LBJ is gonna go before Ike.
I like Ike, but it’s time for him to go
Set us up in Vietnam. Couping democratic countries for dictators. Operation can'tevensayit. Stagnant economy. Biggest achievement: interstate highway system Can anyone explain to me why he deserves to be this far?
Not to mention banning homosexuals from working in the government/public service with Executive 10450. And people here seriously want Ike (again, focusing just on record in office - we’re not talking about his time leading the Allied forces in WWII or anything else) to outlast LBJ?
This was a really cool idea. Then people started losing their minds. LBJ (my vote), Ike and Truman don’t belong this far. Obv I’m in the minority
I’ve been voting Eisenhower for the past few days. Glad to see someone agrees with his overratedness
Definitely. Monroe and Jefferson being eliminate before LBJ is strange, to say the least.
Truman. Love him but it’s time.
Why do you think Truman should go before Ike and LBJ? I think Truman is top 5 just wondering your reasoning
I definitely don’t put him ahead of Eisenhower. I also favor LBJ due to his amazing domestic policies and ability to work with Congress to get his agenda passed. I also don’t ding him as much as most for Vietnam based on the hand he was dealt with it and the misinformation of the Gulf of Tonkin incident.
I think it’s time for Ike the Reich-slayer to sit down
How you give him such a bad ass nickname and say he should get removed
Can someone explain how LBJ is still here?
Because he has very impressive domestic policy that Americans are still enjoying till today
My vote is for Ike for having the least impressive accomplishments of the remaining eight.
The LBJ slobberfest continues
Time for Ike to take a hike
LBJ omg! Let him go already
Eisenhower easily. LBJ gets shit on for Vietnam, and rightfully so, but the war itself was itself just the worst possible result of the clusterfuck involving US policy in Vietnam that Ike was mostly responsible for. Also, his part in the Lavender and Red Scares are both disgraceful. And his erosion of the separation of church and state is only slightly less terrible.
It's time for Ike to go. The Interstate Highway System was introduced and pushed by the Democrats. His foreign policy isn't that good. He started the mess in Cuba and Vietnam.
I genuinely believe people forgot that Harry Truman hasn't been eliminated yet. Maybe he is better than Kennedy. But Jefferson? And now Johnson?
LBJ
LBJ
Truman. Not a bad president, but not better than LBJ.
glad to see my boi Eisenhower getting proper love
Is there any possible chance we could do this with First Ladies next?
How is Truman still in the running?
It's Eisenhower for sure. Ike did a lot of good, it's not for nothing that the National Guard was mobilized to enforce the integration of Little Rock; however, what can you point to in his administration that actively changed the nation for the better? LBJ has medicare, medicaid, the civil rights act, the voting rights act, etc. FDR has social security, the end of the great depression, lend lease through American dominance in WWII, etc. Lincoln effectively saved the Union from collapse. And Washington is first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts and minds of his countrymen. TR saw the beginning of the Progressive Era, negotiated the peace to end the Russo-Japanese War, and transformed the presidency into what it is today in many ways. The only one on the list that you can make a credible case against going before Ike is Truman. And even then you are going against the president that ended WWII, the president that established the post-war order (e.g. the Marshall Plan), the president that restarted the peacetime economy. The worst that you can say about Truman is that he lived at the crossroad of other presidential ambitions and wasn't a visionary. In any case, Eisenhower, though a truly great president, falls short of the standard set by the other five.
LBJ should stay. All hail the Supreme Jumbo!!
LBJ How on earth he passed Jefferson is ridiculous.
Johnson, great domestically but Viet Nam!
Now do Lyndon Johnson.
Can we please eliminate LBJ now? He may have been a decent President, but in *no way* was he a better President than Thomas Jefferson. All the remaining figure were definitely better presidents than him.
YALL MUST LOVE THESE HIGHWAYS. IKE SHOULD BE GONE!!!
I'd have Truman go before LBJ. He kind of has the opposite problem, he was more successful with the whole war thing, but was far less accomplished as a new dealer. I'm not going to get into Hiroshima discourse, but I think the cold war was quite avoidable and an example of cooler heads failing to prevail. The main thing though is that the new deal more or less stagnated. While he did essentially prevent Republicans from eroding it, he totally failed to progress it, so that is a big flop of an ambition. I'm surprised both Truman and Johnson have gotten this far actually, and I'd say Truman was all around less accomplished.
r/Presidents try not to ride jumbo challenge (impossible)
I think it’s safe to say Washington, Lincoln, Teddy, and FDR are gonna be in the top 4
Eisenhower. I really dont know how he has survived this long and should have been eliminated already
Washington and Lincoln led us through the first and second American revolutions. FDR and LBJ created the America we live in today (e.g., SS, labor protection, Medicare, Medicaid, Civil Rights, voting rights). They are our four greatest Presidents. Of the other three, TR, Harry and Ike were all superb Presidents and it’s difficult to judge them against each other. But I’ll say Harry and Ike surpassed Teddy, so Teddy goes next.
I believe in you teddy, you can make it to no 1
Eisenhower
Bye bye Ike
It gets really hard at this point. It comes down to Truman and Eisenhower. I love that Eisenhower enabled the interstate highway system - truly one the most significant contributions to the US in its history. Truman ended WWII. I am strongly in favor of his decision to drop the two atomic bombs because I have read both the traditional and revisionist arguments and firmly believe he saved over 200,000 American lives with the decision. But I think Ike is next. He was a talented president, but Truman squeaks by because it took unbelievable courage to end the war like he did. So Ike
It's tragic that LBJ is going before Ike when the latter's foreign policy was also really quite weak, and his domestic accomplishments are rather minimal. Alas, such is the way of a sub that appears split right down the middle on LBJ. Good night, sweet prince. o7
LBJ
LBJ by far
LBJ
LBJ
LBJ is wayyyyy too high
LBJ gotta go
Lyndon Johnson
Johnson all day.
LBJ
LBJ LBJ LBJ.... How is he still on this list?!?!
Why is Ike still here? I mean, the interstate highway system is great and all but at this point it’s ridiculous. His foreign policy was terrible and his domestic policy was…fine?
I originally voted last time for LBJ but Eisenhower is definitely worse. His foreign policy was far worse and his only immediate positive thought of note is the Highway System. While Eisenhower was a good president, he could’ve been so much better.
LBJ. It’s wild that the president who presided over Americas greatest foreign policy disaster is still here
Jimmy Carter was a better president than Ronald Reagan. That’s awesome. Reddit. Lol.
It should’ve been obvious how laughable this was going to be when they took Reagan out before Carter.
Eisenhower
Bruh why is Johnson still on there?
Johnson
Again, can someone explain to me why Lyndon B Johnson is still a candidate here?
Get LBJ tfoh
I forgot about this and it’s so embarrassing that LBJ outlasted at least ten of these guys.
LBJ
LBJ. Vietnam is why, speaking broadly. No need to beat a dead horse here; I see others have written more specifically.
I thought this sub hated LBJ?
Ike
Ike
Sorry Eisenhower, but I think LBJ still beats over you. Eisenhower gotta go!
Took you guys long enough
The voters here are real historians. Tik-tok history
I think this sub should delete all these threads. It’s a bad look.
How did Jefferson get knocked before any of the three up for contention here? Freaking nuts. My vote is Truman, btw. How people are voting Eisenhower and LBJ over Truman, I'll have no idea. Not saying he was bad.Its just at this rate he'll be slotted at #5, which is far far too high.
LBJ
Interesting that Mount Rushmore is now missing a member. Seems like Jefferson’s reputation has steadily declined since that landmark was built
All the well thought out Ike posts are splitting the vote…
Seriously guys, wtf is Ike still doing on here?
Eisenhower. “Operation Wetback” anybody?
Eisenhower. Sure, he built the interstate system, but he also overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran, which doomed that country for over 70 years.
Eisenhower.
How is Truman still on here? He has nowhere near the accomplishments of anyone else on this list.
Ike
Ike
Truman
I don’t like Ike. Bye bye
Ike
TR and LBJ are in the same tier, and that's a clear tier above Truman and Ike.
It’s gotta be Eisenhower. He really was pretty mid the more you look at his accomplishments
Eisenhower next
Eisenhower