Seems to be a pattern since Vietnam, mostly with the GOP presidencies.

is another issue....

research, of course. I don't have time to do that research right now, so I posted this as a starting point.

The depression era Government contracts for roads and dams were lucrative, but Brown and Root got an E ticket ride on gravy train during the second world war. Lyndon Johnson greased the ways at every turn, even when he was in the service.

Brown & Root -> Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) -> Halliburton

It doesn't seem to specify, but is that the net worth at time of first election to the office, or peak net worth in entire lifetime?

I think it is an interesting and important distinction.

I know that JFK came from wealth, and since he was assassinated, I'm guessing that his wealth came before his election. It would take additional research to get the answers to your question.

that was what was in the Wikipedia article at the link. There are other criteria that indicate success, as you point out.

We are not electing them because they are wealthy.

Their wealth confers upon them the POWER to take the presidency through influence of a variety of types.

You really drew the wrong conclusion and I am surprised. It seems apparent.

"We" is a difficult word, since "we" are a vary diverse society. I try not to characterize the entire society in things like this. Each voter votes according to his or her own priorities.

However, I do believe that financial success is something we generally expect for people we elect. It's an indicator of someone who has been able to generate wealth in some way. Still, some were born to wealth. JFK is an example of that. People who are true leaders generally are pretty successful, financially, though. Not all, but most.

Several noteables were near pennyless at one point or another. Jefferson died owning more than he was worth. Grant wrote his memoirs so that he could provide for his family. It worked too, although basically after he died. Somewhere along the way we decided there should be pensions because it gets too embarrassing to have destitute ex-presidents.