i would say Franklin d. Roosevelt, for the changes during the depression, and as a side note, who knows what things might have been like if John and Robert Kennedy had"nt been stopped short in life.
2007-06-14 09:17:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by soundchaser 3
·
6⤊
0⤋
President Abraham Lincoln
2007-06-18 02:56:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Michelle 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
I'm kind of between Woodrow Wilson and Herbert Hoover. Wilson was on the right track for hoping to tone down the negotiations against Germany after WWI and his ideas about the League of Nations had merit (the result was pretty worthless, as is its successor, the UN, but the idea was good). Herbert Hoover got a bum rap. FDR loudly assumed several of the measures that Hoover quietly began and Hoover was the first president to use the telephone in a major way during a crisis, with several lines installed for what was essentially phone conferences during the economic crisis that happened on his watch--a crisis that he warned Calvin Coolidge about, by the way, so it was in the works when Hoover showed up. Hoover held a notion that was long thought to be common wisdom, government should keep its hands off of business, laisse faire. Even when I got my economics degree it was commonly taught that government's fiscal policy needs to be, or have a net effect of, neutral to the economy. We use monetary policy (federal reserve) to gently nudge the effects of money on an economy. British economist Keynes assumed a more active role of government would be appropriate, and that was a revolutionary thought in its day. Hoover's crisis management led him to such conculsions, as FDR more openly realized, that in times of great economic upheval, government is the only real entity at times that can be marshalled to help the public, but he wanted to do so quietly in order not to ruffle feathers of politically powerful people who could derail it if it were too poorly handled. Hoover was a quiet man, as quiet as FDR was publicly gregarious. Hoover was a self-depreciating, humble man and didn't want credit for his efforts (boy did that ever become a fact), because the politicians and press at the time realized what work he was doing and praised him--in his day.
Remember the old Quantum Leap TV show a few years ago? Scott Bakula's character would jump into the skin of other people to help solve problems? If I could, similarly, be there, of all the US presidents, I would most wanted to watch Hoover try to help, first, or Wilson, a close second. They were both admirable, though often ignored, men.
2007-06-20 22:26:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by Rabbit 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
President lincoln was the best president under pressure, or that was tested under pressure to be fair to those who had not been. but he had nothing to do with reconstruction, that was Andrew Johnson and US Grant, and that went horrible, to much political infighting and swindling going on after the Civil war. FDR hs to be in the top 3, the depression aand WWII, he was elected 4 times, he must have been doing something right? teddy Roosevelt was no slouch at handling civil dishaveal with the massive strikes and commericial graft and busting up of the monopolies, walk soflty carry a bigstick, for our first international president, he set the standard of how to deal with hot head little nations that attack our interest abroad.
2007-06-14 20:13:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by edjdonnell 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Roxi, Abe Lincoln did not handle Reconstruction. He was killed in April 1865 even before the Civil War ended.
As for best President... FDR... hands down. While he had socialist programs to try and combat the depression those programs helped our country feel secure, and people to gain some self-respect back after Hoover. His handling of WWII and foresight of the lend-lease program before entering WWII was also genius.
2007-06-19 19:13:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by historyhnyb 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
I think Washington was the greatest man to be president, but I think Lincoln overcame the greatest friction as president. 'Some men are great and some men have greatness thrust upon them.' I think Lincoln falls into the latter category.
I don't think a twentieth century president should be considered (Teddy Ros., FDR, Truman, JFK, or Reagan). Had FDR not stayed in power so long, had Truman not led in the time he lead, had JFK been exposed through living history, and had Communism not fallen there is not much greatness. Lincoln on the other hand, made the hard decisions which affected paradigmatic change. Sure there was war, but there also was unity and freedom for America.
2007-06-14 16:43:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Izdiwaj 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
Dwight D Eisehower
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/de34.html
2007-06-15 15:34:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Hey Roxi: I posed this question as a poll back on President's Day, asking for the best and worst presidents. The results were as follows:
Best:
1) Lincoln (by a wide margin)
2) Washington
3) Jefferson
Worst:
1) Clinton
2) Nixon
3) Grant and Harding (tie)
I got responses from as far away as Austria.
Always nice to see that some people are still interested in US history.
2007-06-14 16:34:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by cjones1303 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
A far more interesting question would be declaring the worst president.
Of course, history has not provided any context for the current administration, so my vote for worst actually preceded Lincoln in the White House: James Buchanan.
2007-06-14 16:26:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by el_dormilon 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Thomas Jefferson
2007-06-20 19:04:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by Letizia 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Roosevelt was much better than Lincoln. Both Lincoln and Roosevelt solved major problems, though Roosevelt did it without declaring war unlike Lincoln.
I'd also have to give an honorable mention to Truman as well.
2007-06-14 16:21:59
·
answer #11
·
answered by William E. Roberts 5
·
4⤊
0⤋