So, less than a month after George W. is out of office, a group of historians were surveyed and ranked the 42 presidents. Lincoln came out #1, of course, followed by Washington.
George W. ranked 36th, with Buchanan last, as always.
I find part of the last sentence interesting: "...and the difficulty of assessing any president who has only just recently left office." I've always believed this, especially as Clinton jumped 6 points in this survey, as the scandals have faded from modern memory, and history starts to take over.
I'm most interested to see where George W. will be in 60 years. A good example of the oddities of "historical perspective": Harry Truman dropped two nuclear bombs on a civilian population, started the Korean War, almost finished it, then retreated to a semi-stable tie (we are still technically at war). His cabinet was corrupt, his approval ratings equaled Bush's (the other way around, really), and he stacked the Supreme Court with his buddies. This current survey ranks Truman as the 5th greatest President.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/16/historians-give-bush-bad-early-verdict/#more-40184
George W. ranked 36th, with Buchanan last, as always.
I find part of the last sentence interesting: "...and the difficulty of assessing any president who has only just recently left office." I've always believed this, especially as Clinton jumped 6 points in this survey, as the scandals have faded from modern memory, and history starts to take over.
I'm most interested to see where George W. will be in 60 years. A good example of the oddities of "historical perspective": Harry Truman dropped two nuclear bombs on a civilian population, started the Korean War, almost finished it, then retreated to a semi-stable tie (we are still technically at war). His cabinet was corrupt, his approval ratings equaled Bush's (the other way around, really), and he stacked the Supreme Court with his buddies. This current survey ranks Truman as the 5th greatest President.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/16/historians-give-bush-bad-early-verdict/#more-40184