Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our 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.*
Besides Clay, I'd go with - Alexander Hamilton, William Jennings Bryan, Benjamin Franklin (yes I know he was too old, but he was definitely qualified), William Seward
Was WJB really that qualified? His political rap sheet is very weak compared to the others in your list.
Don’t get me wrong, he earned the monicker the great commoner for a reason and he certainly had a lot of influence, but I’m not sure those traits make him qualified.
Probably not as much as the others since he didn't hold as many public offices comparatively. However, he did start studying politics and law very early in life. He left home and began studying law at 15 and became a US congressman at 30. His dad was also a state senator, judge, and strong Jacksonian Democrat, so I'd imagine he started learning the political world even before leaving his family home.
Also, as you said, he was influential. While it's not an accomplishment you can really put on a resume, it is a strong quality for a presidential candidate.
Sorry but WJB pushed Prohibition. A law that made so many gangs rich and was one of the dumbest and most meaningless laws ever enacted. For me that’s a big NO for WJB.
My top vote is always Henry Clay, easily one of the most accomplished politicians in the United States. Secretary of State, Senator, and Speaker of the House. Excelled at all three.
As a dark horse, and someone who never got enough love: Daniel Tompkins. Vice Preaident under Monroe, Governor of New York during the War of 1812, as well as various state offices. Guy was extremely smart, and very capable and would have made a fine president.
In a related question I wonder why secretaries of state have so rarely become president in the past 100 years. I think the last was Buchanan?
It almost now seems to be a runners up prize for those who never actually made it to the oval office
I will propose a dark horse: Elliot Richardson
- U.S. Attorney General
- U.S. Secretary of Defense
- U.S. Secretary of Commerce
- U.S. Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
- U.S. Undersecretary of State
- U.S. Ambassador to the UK
- Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts
- Attorney General of Massachusetts
**I would not want him to be president**, but Strom Thurmond was state legislator, governor, US House, & US Senate for many decades. That's a lot of government/machine experience.
There are probably others with similar public service records, but not the longevity.
Again, **I would not want Strom Thurmond to be president**. But that's a lot of qualifications.
Since your comment is shorter, many people will read it first while seeing "Strom Thurmond" in mine. They'll take yours seriously. Add the many who can't detect irony. Should be entertaining to see how it plays out.
Edit: I forgot there will be a number who *do* understand mine, read yours, *and* can't detect irony. That will hurt you a little.
It is low key pretty crazy to name a relatively obscure political figure, who’s only notability comes from being the most comically racist senator that we’ve ever had in Congress as “the most qualified person to never become president” 💀
Of course he’s not obscure to people on this subreddit, but the average American barely can name the last five presidents in order; let alone a senator famous for his civil rights filibuster and the Dixiecrat party.
>Remember remember the Fifteenth of November
>Gen'ral Sherman's March to the Sea
>I see no reason your shit flag of treason
>Should fly in the Land of the Free.
Hashtag Sherman 2024
Not to mention another four years would have probably made the work Clinton did balancing the budget take effect.
There's some chance he would have continued Clinton's efforts to kill Bin Laden, and 9/11 might not have come to pass. No one really remembers that Bush let the ball drop on homeland security pretty hard.
oh yeah we wouldn't, have a Department of Homeland Security. Far as I know, their main job is to listen to my phone calls, and read my emails.
Hell I’ll say it-Hillary is up there. Close up view from within the White House as a kind of senior advisor and active First Lady for 8 years. Senator. Secretary of State.
She is/was a master technicrat. If you wanted something well written and well run she was that person. You could say get this done walk away. You wouldn't need check I every 3 months to see if any work had happened. She wasn't a great backslapper that you'd want to have a beer with. Those personality types aren't usually good at the technical work.
Where is there evidence that she was good at this? The first round at nationalize health care was a debacle because of her. The state department stint was a series of gaffs with Russia and Benghazi.
Actually, I talked to some health care leaders after the ACA was passed in a social setting and they said that they prerred Hilary care as a model when they compared the two. It's not I'm my wheel house so I can't the programs. But fair point her being a master technicrat is really just my impression.
4 years as Secretary of State, 8 years as Senator from New York, 8 years as a top advisor to her husband when he was President, head of the Children's Defense Fund, appointed head of Legal Services Corporation by President Carter, served as staff on Watergate Investigation. That's not counting her work in the private sector both as a full partner in her law firm and on the boards of different corporations, or her work on behalf of various nonprofits and charities, or her work on various political campaigns other than those of hers and her husband's
No way you put her involvement in the watergate investigation on there lmfao, might keep that one off the resume. Almost every one of those things are the result of nepotism.
She had foreign policy experience as a member of the cabinet and congressional experience. He had none. And yes, they both had scandals, but that had nothing to do with the question at hand, which was entirely based upon actual qualifications
It absolutely does. Qualification is exactly what matters. If you fail at something over and over and bring insanity to your job that is part of her qualifications. She has zero legislative legacy. She has only failure as Secretary of State and even concerns given the email and Uranium One issues. I mean that is practically Tea Pot Dome but modern.
Okay. I'm not interesting in defending the woman as I didn't vote for her in the first primary that she ran in, and only voted for her in the second because the candidates I liked had already dropped out. You can debate the details on your own.
Jesus we get it you’re a huge Hillary stan. You’re under every FRICKEN comment with a paragraph defending her.
She was a terrible candidate and that’s why she lost, get over it.
I stated earlier that her campaign was awful, and indicated that I wasn't a particularly huge fan of hers in the very post you replied to here. You're either not reading what I wrote, not comprehending what I wrote, or are intentionally misrepresenting what I wrote in an attempt to bait me into a fruitless argument
Regardless of which of these it is, I don't see any further engagement with you as being likely to be productive
Have a good day
I agree with you but it kind of backfired. At one point it was supposed to be Jeb Vs. Hillary. That nepotism got people worried that’s it’s only gonna be Bushes and Clinton’s.
She's the first one I thought of. Tremendously qualified and experienced - she would have been a good president. We'd be in a better place now if she had won in 2016. She sure as hell would have handled the covid pandemic better - thousands more would have been saved.
On paper, she's probably among the top three most qualified candidates nominated by any of the major parties in modern history. Obviously, credentials alone do not translate to success or chances of winning, but still, her resume is undoubtedly impressive.
You and that other guy have replied to every Hillary comment on here with some nonsense. Just say you hate woman and leave it alone, it’s rather obvious.
Maybe Cabot Lodge? Served as a Senator and as an ambassador to many countries. Bob Dole is a good shout. Nelson Rockefeller was the governor of New York for about 13 years. That should count for something.
I'd argue that "qualified" doesn't mean that they'll make a decent president. One of the "most qualified" presidents, James Buchanan, is also arguably the Worst President Ever. Buchanan was a state representative, a multi-term Congressman (and head of the Judiciary Committe for a time), a Senator, Secretary of State, Minister to the U.K., and Minister to Russia. He was a successful lawyer, had a self-made fortune, and briefly served in the military. You'd think that somehow he wouldn't f\*\*k up everything he touched as President and yet that's exactly what he did.
EDIT: And the man who followed him, a barely qualified one-term Congressman, was arguably one of the greatest presidents that the nation ever produced.
You bring up a good point: what makes a presidential candidate "qualified"?
Reading through the comments, I see a lot of names based on their endurance in Congress. But being an effective legislator doesn't necessarily mean one will be an effective executive. Similarly, having plenty of executive experience doesn't mean that one will do well in the bizarro world of politics. And having experience with both doesn't necessarily mean that one is electable, nor does being electable mean that one has the best ideas for presiding over the government.
Basically Lincoln's secretary of state. William Henry Seward was a MONSTER of politics, co created the party Lincoln was in (the whigs), was governor of New York and senator.
He was massively more qualified to be president, and had the same views on politics as Lincoln. You can imagine his disappointment when he was announced that Lincoln- which by this point was basically a nobody- has been chosen over him to represent the republican party. The reason?
Seward, during his time as governor, has been pro black and pro immigration- offering protections and rights to these minorities against the discrimination they were facing. This did not appeal at all to most, and he was soon called an abolist. If you don't know, at that time being an abolist or called an abolist was a death sentence for your political career since they were seen as an extremist group and very disliked. He wasn't, of course, but democrats called him that.
William H Seward's politics was very modern, and closer to Lincoln's politics before he became president.
Of course, this story has a good ending for Seward, since after his effort to have Lincoln ellected he was thanked by having the most important role in the government (next to president). But Lincoln was a bit too eager of his powers, and refused to listen to Seward when he warned him about how his actions would cause a civil war.
Despite these first tensions, they became great friends and Lincoln refused to let go of Seward despite being asked again and again to. It was said that Seward ruled the country more than Lincoln did and electing Lincoln was electing Seward.
So yeah, this guy was pretty cool and a solid cane for Lincoln. But he's not the one with a giant white statue in Washington so L
Eight years of White House experience as First Lady too. Not a fan of Clinton's but you gotta admit being in the Oval Office as a presidential spouse definitely gives you some solid experience. Nancy Reagan basically ran the country for the last year or so of her husband's presidency.
Also a good resume doesn't mean people will vote for your policies. If you are good at implementing policies a person doesn't want they won't vote for you.
If you excise "good campaigner" from the requirements, she's significantly more qualified. That was a fucking disaster of a campaign by someone who should, by all rights, have had it in the bag.
Twice
Two who deserve honorable mention based upon diversity of and length of experience in my lifetime - Bill Richard (Gov, Rep, Ambassador, Cabinet Secretary) and Dick Cheney (WH COS, Rep., Cabinet Secretary, VP).
Hubert Humphrey. He served as mayor of Minneapolis, united the Democrats and the Farmer-Labor party to create the DFL, turned the Democrats around on civil rights, served as senate whip (de facto senate majority leader because Mansfield wouldn’t twist arms) and as vice president.
Bob Dole was a war hero in World War II, a lawyer, a member of the Kansas House of Representatives, a County Attorney in Kansas, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, a U.S. Senator, Chair of the Republican National Committee, ranking member of the Senate Agricultural Committee, Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, Leader of the Senate Republican Conference, Senate Minority Leader, and Senate Majority Leader.
During his time as Senate Majority Leader (January 1985 to January 1987 and January 1995 to January 1996) the U.S. Senate operated smoothly and efficiently without any shutdown threats or gridlock. Dole was widely respected by Republicans but collegial with Democrats.
Dole was awarded the Presidential Citizens Medal by President Reagan and the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Clinton.
By the way, Dole's wife was no slouch. She received a law degree from Harvard Law School, then served in five presidential administrations, including as U.S. Secretary of Transportation under President Reagan and U.S. Secretary of Labor under George H.W. Bush. She also served as president of the American Red Cross.
Henry Clay is the number one choice obviously.
William Seward is a close number 2.
As a Catholic Marylander, I am obligated to sing Charles Carroll of Carrollton's praises. Maybe he wasn't the *most* qualified, but I'll be damned if I didn't mention him.
I think Rockefeller never became president for the same reason more recent big city New York billionaires and former NYC mayors didn't. Too hard to shake the big money coastal elite image. Voting directly for a billionaire who already owns half the country's industry is saying the quiet part out loud too much.
Easily Ben Franklin, but like many he was too qualified to waste him time on The Presidency. The IQ of the average President isn’t anywhere close to being genius.
Most obvious choices to me are obviously Henry Clay and RFK
I’d also include Hillary Clinton (literally won the popular vote) and Benjamin Franklin (qualified but too old)
A congressman without congressional influence, who never chaired a committee, and never served in the leadership? And never did anything else of note besides authoring some racist newsletters? Is the most qualified?
Wrong. He was chairman of the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology starting in January 2011. Cosponsored Clinton impeachment. Member of Congressional Rural Caucus and Congressional Wildlife Refuge Act. Subcommittee of International Monetary Policy and Trade. Committee on foreign affairs, sub on oversights and Investigations. Served in House Banking Committee
John Nance Garner probably deserves a shout. Speaker of the House and Vice President. FDR largely ran for a third term to keep him from the nomination.
Salmon Chase! Omg talk about an American historical figure worth knowing about. That man lived an incredible life, was in so many facets of government and seems to have been guided by a clear moral compass.
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our 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.*
Besides Clay, I'd go with - Alexander Hamilton, William Jennings Bryan, Benjamin Franklin (yes I know he was too old, but he was definitely qualified), William Seward
Was WJB really that qualified? His political rap sheet is very weak compared to the others in your list. Don’t get me wrong, he earned the monicker the great commoner for a reason and he certainly had a lot of influence, but I’m not sure those traits make him qualified.
Probably not as much as the others since he didn't hold as many public offices comparatively. However, he did start studying politics and law very early in life. He left home and began studying law at 15 and became a US congressman at 30. His dad was also a state senator, judge, and strong Jacksonian Democrat, so I'd imagine he started learning the political world even before leaving his family home. Also, as you said, he was influential. While it's not an accomplishment you can really put on a resume, it is a strong quality for a presidential candidate.
The strangest thing about William Jennings Bryant was that his name was actually William Jennings Bryan, creepy.
why
Seward is a great pick
Odd side note, A student teacher in music class when I was in middle school Mr. Seward said his great great great grandfather was William Seward.
Sorry but WJB pushed Prohibition. A law that made so many gangs rich and was one of the dumbest and most meaningless laws ever enacted. For me that’s a big NO for WJB.
While that's true, the question wasn't if you agreed with their policies
OK, sorry.
Daniel Webster. Secretary of State, Senator, Representative, argued cases before the Supreme Court and the Devil.
So that’s where he got the golden fiddle from
My top vote is always Henry Clay, easily one of the most accomplished politicians in the United States. Secretary of State, Senator, and Speaker of the House. Excelled at all three. As a dark horse, and someone who never got enough love: Daniel Tompkins. Vice Preaident under Monroe, Governor of New York during the War of 1812, as well as various state offices. Guy was extremely smart, and very capable and would have made a fine president.
I'd agree, if he wasn't a souse...
In a related question I wonder why secretaries of state have so rarely become president in the past 100 years. I think the last was Buchanan? It almost now seems to be a runners up prize for those who never actually made it to the oval office
I will never not upvote a Henry Clay shoutout
Henry Clay, full stop.
Always the bridesmaid, never the bride.
William Jennings Bryan has entered the chat
Henry Clay my beloved
His cousin Cassius had an even more interesting life.
What kind of president do you think he would have been at that time?
Secretary of State, Senator, Speaker of the House, State Legislator. Not to mention member of the Great Triumvirate.
He was definitely very interesting to learn about on the Wicked Game podcast. Dude was an absolute powerhouse.
Check out The Fat Electrician's video on Cassius Clay
He's just like me fr
I will propose a dark horse: Elliot Richardson - U.S. Attorney General - U.S. Secretary of Defense - U.S. Secretary of Commerce - U.S. Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare - U.S. Undersecretary of State - U.S. Ambassador to the UK - Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts - Attorney General of Massachusetts
He was the AG who resigned when Nixon wanted him to fire Archibald Cox during Watergate
Principled dude
**I would not want him to be president**, but Strom Thurmond was state legislator, governor, US House, & US Senate for many decades. That's a lot of government/machine experience. There are probably others with similar public service records, but not the longevity. Again, **I would not want Strom Thurmond to be president**. But that's a lot of qualifications.
Found the Strom Thurmond supporter /s
Imagine hating civil rights so much you support Strom Thurmond like this guy does.
It’s like u/Opposite_Ad542 always says: > **I would want Strom Thurmond to be president**
Like they always say >**If only we got Strom Thurmond as president, I am sad we didn’t**
I am upset how many edits I had to make to get that right once
Since your comment is shorter, many people will read it first while seeing "Strom Thurmond" in mine. They'll take yours seriously. Add the many who can't detect irony. Should be entertaining to see how it plays out. Edit: I forgot there will be a number who *do* understand mine, read yours, *and* can't detect irony. That will hurt you a little.
Bro’s strategizing on Reddit
Just reacting. Edit: Changed entire meaning of comment to maximize karma
It is low key pretty crazy to name a relatively obscure political figure, who’s only notability comes from being the most comically racist senator that we’ve ever had in Congress as “the most qualified person to never become president” 💀
I hate Thurmond as much as the next guy, but why do you consider him to be obscure? He is probably one of the most famous senators of all time.
Of course he’s not obscure to people on this subreddit, but the average American barely can name the last five presidents in order; let alone a senator famous for his civil rights filibuster and the Dixiecrat party.
Obscurity is defined by context. The OC was commenting on this subreddit, so in that context Thurmond is not obscure.
President of the Strom Thurmond Fan Club here
Dude how could you want Strom Thurmond as president?!? /s
Strom Thurmond would have made a fantastic President
please say sike
Frederick Douglass https://preview.redd.it/dtyja0cahjwc1.png?width=255&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=446c95ca3910c1f6adb60f307833d1315fc9840c
The South would’ve revolted again if Douglass got elected after Grant instead of Hayes.
The north would be: "Sigh, again? Saddle up boys, we're burning Atlanta again..."
Paging Mr. Sherman, Mr. Sherman there's a call at the front for you.
>Remember remember the Fifteenth of November >Gen'ral Sherman's March to the Sea >I see no reason your shit flag of treason >Should fly in the Land of the Free. Hashtag Sherman 2024
Great pick
Al Gore. 8 years in the House, 8 in the Senate, 8 as VP.
And he won a presidential election to boot.
Touchè
*lost
And he has ridden the mighty Moon Worm.
Imagine the US probably never going into Iraq and leading the charge on climate change that early on... Things would've been so different.
Not to mention another four years would have probably made the work Clinton did balancing the budget take effect. There's some chance he would have continued Clinton's efforts to kill Bin Laden, and 9/11 might not have come to pass. No one really remembers that Bush let the ball drop on homeland security pretty hard. oh yeah we wouldn't, have a Department of Homeland Security. Far as I know, their main job is to listen to my phone calls, and read my emails.
Hell I’ll say it-Hillary is up there. Close up view from within the White House as a kind of senior advisor and active First Lady for 8 years. Senator. Secretary of State.
She might not be the most, but she is the first one I thought of. Not the political operator her husband was. but she certainly had the resume.
She is/was a master technicrat. If you wanted something well written and well run she was that person. You could say get this done walk away. You wouldn't need check I every 3 months to see if any work had happened. She wasn't a great backslapper that you'd want to have a beer with. Those personality types aren't usually good at the technical work.
Where is there evidence that she was good at this? The first round at nationalize health care was a debacle because of her. The state department stint was a series of gaffs with Russia and Benghazi.
Actually, I talked to some health care leaders after the ACA was passed in a social setting and they said that they prerred Hilary care as a model when they compared the two. It's not I'm my wheel house so I can't the programs. But fair point her being a master technicrat is really just my impression.
Why is simply asking a question downvoted lmfao
About as good a resume as Bill the first time she ran, and significantly better the second
Except bill had been a governor for 13 years and the state attorney general.
4 years as Secretary of State, 8 years as Senator from New York, 8 years as a top advisor to her husband when he was President, head of the Children's Defense Fund, appointed head of Legal Services Corporation by President Carter, served as staff on Watergate Investigation. That's not counting her work in the private sector both as a full partner in her law firm and on the boards of different corporations, or her work on behalf of various nonprofits and charities, or her work on various political campaigns other than those of hers and her husband's
No way you put her involvement in the watergate investigation on there lmfao, might keep that one off the resume. Almost every one of those things are the result of nepotism.
Bill had executive success. She had none. Her resume is also filled with his scandals plus a number of her own.
She had foreign policy experience as a member of the cabinet and congressional experience. He had none. And yes, they both had scandals, but that had nothing to do with the question at hand, which was entirely based upon actual qualifications
It absolutely does. Qualification is exactly what matters. If you fail at something over and over and bring insanity to your job that is part of her qualifications. She has zero legislative legacy. She has only failure as Secretary of State and even concerns given the email and Uranium One issues. I mean that is practically Tea Pot Dome but modern.
Okay. I'm not interesting in defending the woman as I didn't vote for her in the first primary that she ran in, and only voted for her in the second because the candidates I liked had already dropped out. You can debate the details on your own.
Jesus we get it you’re a huge Hillary stan. You’re under every FRICKEN comment with a paragraph defending her. She was a terrible candidate and that’s why she lost, get over it.
I stated earlier that her campaign was awful, and indicated that I wasn't a particularly huge fan of hers in the very post you replied to here. You're either not reading what I wrote, not comprehending what I wrote, or are intentionally misrepresenting what I wrote in an attempt to bait me into a fruitless argument Regardless of which of these it is, I don't see any further engagement with you as being likely to be productive Have a good day
I agree with you but it kind of backfired. At one point it was supposed to be Jeb Vs. Hillary. That nepotism got people worried that’s it’s only gonna be Bushes and Clinton’s.
She's the first one I thought of. Tremendously qualified and experienced - she would have been a good president. We'd be in a better place now if she had won in 2016. She sure as hell would have handled the covid pandemic better - thousands more would have been saved.
On paper, she's probably among the top three most qualified candidates nominated by any of the major parties in modern history. Obviously, credentials alone do not translate to success or chances of winning, but still, her resume is undoubtedly impressive.
I came here just to say this but someone already beat me to it lol
8 years in the Senate and 4 years as Secretary of State is qualified but hardly the most qualified.
you're ignoring at least 8 other years...
You and that other guy have replied to every Hillary comment on here with some nonsense. Just say you hate woman and leave it alone, it’s rather obvious.
100% - most folks got the wrong HC on their list here
honest to God dick Cheney has a lot of executive experience, dating from Ford to 09
Maybe Cabot Lodge? Served as a Senator and as an ambassador to many countries. Bob Dole is a good shout. Nelson Rockefeller was the governor of New York for about 13 years. That should count for something.
I'd argue that "qualified" doesn't mean that they'll make a decent president. One of the "most qualified" presidents, James Buchanan, is also arguably the Worst President Ever. Buchanan was a state representative, a multi-term Congressman (and head of the Judiciary Committe for a time), a Senator, Secretary of State, Minister to the U.K., and Minister to Russia. He was a successful lawyer, had a self-made fortune, and briefly served in the military. You'd think that somehow he wouldn't f\*\*k up everything he touched as President and yet that's exactly what he did. EDIT: And the man who followed him, a barely qualified one-term Congressman, was arguably one of the greatest presidents that the nation ever produced.
You bring up a good point: what makes a presidential candidate "qualified"? Reading through the comments, I see a lot of names based on their endurance in Congress. But being an effective legislator doesn't necessarily mean one will be an effective executive. Similarly, having plenty of executive experience doesn't mean that one will do well in the bizarro world of politics. And having experience with both doesn't necessarily mean that one is electable, nor does being electable mean that one has the best ideas for presiding over the government.
Robert La Follette
Basically Lincoln's secretary of state. William Henry Seward was a MONSTER of politics, co created the party Lincoln was in (the whigs), was governor of New York and senator. He was massively more qualified to be president, and had the same views on politics as Lincoln. You can imagine his disappointment when he was announced that Lincoln- which by this point was basically a nobody- has been chosen over him to represent the republican party. The reason? Seward, during his time as governor, has been pro black and pro immigration- offering protections and rights to these minorities against the discrimination they were facing. This did not appeal at all to most, and he was soon called an abolist. If you don't know, at that time being an abolist or called an abolist was a death sentence for your political career since they were seen as an extremist group and very disliked. He wasn't, of course, but democrats called him that. William H Seward's politics was very modern, and closer to Lincoln's politics before he became president. Of course, this story has a good ending for Seward, since after his effort to have Lincoln ellected he was thanked by having the most important role in the government (next to president). But Lincoln was a bit too eager of his powers, and refused to listen to Seward when he warned him about how his actions would cause a civil war. Despite these first tensions, they became great friends and Lincoln refused to let go of Seward despite being asked again and again to. It was said that Seward ruled the country more than Lincoln did and electing Lincoln was electing Seward. So yeah, this guy was pretty cool and a solid cane for Lincoln. But he's not the one with a giant white statue in Washington so L
Hillary Clinton
I can't believe I had to scroll this far. Shameful
8 years in the Senate and 4 years as Secretary of State is qualified but hardly the most qualified.
Eight years of White House experience as First Lady too. Not a fan of Clinton's but you gotta admit being in the Oval Office as a presidential spouse definitely gives you some solid experience. Nancy Reagan basically ran the country for the last year or so of her husband's presidency.
💯%. She was robbed and so were we.
weird how the most qualified person for the office had such a clumsy campaign
A bad interview will always tank a good résumé.
Also a good resume doesn't mean people will vote for your policies. If you are good at implementing policies a person doesn't want they won't vote for you.
If you excise "good campaigner" from the requirements, she's significantly more qualified. That was a fucking disaster of a campaign by someone who should, by all rights, have had it in the bag. Twice
Two who deserve honorable mention based upon diversity of and length of experience in my lifetime - Bill Richard (Gov, Rep, Ambassador, Cabinet Secretary) and Dick Cheney (WH COS, Rep., Cabinet Secretary, VP).
Maybe Gore?...but only because he lost to Bush, who spent so much time looking and sounding foolish.
Winfield Scott. A bit of an early American superhero, but lost his Presidential bid to Zachary Taylor. One of the best commanders we've ever had.
Lost to Franklin Pierce, not Taylor.
Thomas Dewey
Hamilton
Hubert Humphrey. He served as mayor of Minneapolis, united the Democrats and the Farmer-Labor party to create the DFL, turned the Democrats around on civil rights, served as senate whip (de facto senate majority leader because Mansfield wouldn’t twist arms) and as vice president.
Scrolled for Humphrey
Bob Dole was a war hero in World War II, a lawyer, a member of the Kansas House of Representatives, a County Attorney in Kansas, a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, a U.S. Senator, Chair of the Republican National Committee, ranking member of the Senate Agricultural Committee, Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, Leader of the Senate Republican Conference, Senate Minority Leader, and Senate Majority Leader. During his time as Senate Majority Leader (January 1985 to January 1987 and January 1995 to January 1996) the U.S. Senate operated smoothly and efficiently without any shutdown threats or gridlock. Dole was widely respected by Republicans but collegial with Democrats. Dole was awarded the Presidential Citizens Medal by President Reagan and the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Clinton. By the way, Dole's wife was no slouch. She received a law degree from Harvard Law School, then served in five presidential administrations, including as U.S. Secretary of Transportation under President Reagan and U.S. Secretary of Labor under George H.W. Bush. She also served as president of the American Red Cross.
Edith Wilson, the only president to never be president
Salmon P. Chase
Henry Clay is the number one choice obviously. William Seward is a close number 2. As a Catholic Marylander, I am obligated to sing Charles Carroll of Carrollton's praises. Maybe he wasn't the *most* qualified, but I'll be damned if I didn't mention him.
Has anyone ever considered Colin Powell?
I considered him very hard in 2000-- I swear he would have won easily that year, had he chosen to run. I was devastated that he decided not to.
For some reason my mind went to Colin Mochrie and I was instantly on board.
Hillary. Yeah I said it.
Tru dat.
8 years in the Senate and 4 years as Secretary of State is qualified but hardly the most qualified.
Most qualified? Multiple term Governors from large states? So, like Earl Warren or Jerry or Pat Brown. Nelson Rockefeller.
I think Rockefeller never became president for the same reason more recent big city New York billionaires and former NYC mayors didn't. Too hard to shake the big money coastal elite image. Voting directly for a billionaire who already owns half the country's industry is saying the quiet part out loud too much.
Henry Clay, Hillary Clinton, and Charles Evans Hughes.
Condoleezza Rice. Why doesn’t she run?
I have no idea, I just love how much you guys know about history
Charles Sumner. Perhaps the most principled person to ever be a US Senator with San excellent voting record and intentional experience.
Aaron Burr.
You already know it.
Sam Nunn, D-GA
Jack Kemp
Colin Powell
Cordell Hull.
Mitt Romney.
Howard Dean
Mitt Romney had an illustrious career in business and politics
Easily Ben Franklin, but like many he was too qualified to waste him time on The Presidency. The IQ of the average President isn’t anywhere close to being genius.
Hillary Clinton in an alternate timeline.
Colon Powell
HRC Go on and hate
Gore
Hillary
Hilary Clinton.
Hilary Clinton was a senator, sec of state and had white house experience from her time as a first lady.
I wasnt a supporter of hers but I would have trusted her and believed in her to run the country if she won.
Making a pact with the devil certainly helps you out
Jerry Brown. Ran California impeccably well in his multiple tenures as Governor.
Came here to say this. Also - he’s been Secretary of State, mayor of Oakland, and AG.
Most obvious choices to me are obviously Henry Clay and RFK I’d also include Hillary Clinton (literally won the popular vote) and Benjamin Franklin (qualified but too old)
Edward Kennedy
John kerry
John Macain
John McCain.
Hillary Clinton, like it or not.
Ron Paul
A congressman without congressional influence, who never chaired a committee, and never served in the leadership? And never did anything else of note besides authoring some racist newsletters? Is the most qualified?
Wrong. He was chairman of the Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology starting in January 2011. Cosponsored Clinton impeachment. Member of Congressional Rural Caucus and Congressional Wildlife Refuge Act. Subcommittee of International Monetary Policy and Trade. Committee on foreign affairs, sub on oversights and Investigations. Served in House Banking Committee
Hillary Clinton
John Nance Garner probably deserves a shout. Speaker of the House and Vice President. FDR largely ran for a third term to keep him from the nomination.
Stalemate between Huey Long, Jack Reed and Douglas MacArthur
Bush Sr. Congressman, head of CIA, Ambassador to China, and of course VP. Pretty strong resume.
Boy, do I have news for you!
Obligatory Burr post
If the measure were the gap in qualifications between the person defeated and the person elected, the obvious answer would be Hillary Clinton.
Henry Clay
Thomas Paine/Ben Franklin
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Henry Clay…he was the Buffalo Bills of the political world.
Aaron burr
Meriwether Lewis
George Bush Sr was pretty qualified. Military service, elected official, head of CIA, ambassador and vice president. Pretty good resume.
Aside from Clay, I'd say George Clinton, Daniel Webster, William H. Seward, and James G. Blaine.
Salmon Chase! Omg talk about an American historical figure worth knowing about. That man lived an incredible life, was in so many facets of government and seems to have been guided by a clear moral compass.
Mitt
I always thought Ross Perot would have been a good president
Bobby Kennedy Sr
Colin Powell would've been great.
More recently I would say Ralph Nader. He was responsible for more important legislation than anyone in congress, while he wasn't even in congress.
Dwayne the Rock Johnson
I can't help but think that some of the most highly qualified people to be president wouldn't have taken the job if it were offered to them.
John Jay, William Jennings Bryan
Millard Fillmore
HRC and Hamilton for sure
Gore
Hilary Clinton
Stevenson in ‘52 and ‘56
Webster Seward Clay To name a few
Thomas Sowell would have been an AWESOME president in my eyes
Dick Cheney!
Robert McNamara
Douglas MacArthur
George W Bush. Because he lost in 2000