Washington Lags in Polls of Top Presidents (Reagan 1st for CNN/USA/G poll)

Washington Lags in Polls of Top Presidents

Mon Feb 21,10:00 AM ET

By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - When Americans rate their greatest president, they do not agree on who tops the list, but seem to rank a half-dozen chief executives ahead of the nation's first. George Washington tied for sixth place in one recent poll and rated seventh in another.

...

But in a poll commissioned by Washington College for President's Day, Americans rated Abraham Lincoln as the greatest president. A CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll put Ronald Reagan (news - web sites) on top.

...

Asked who was the greatest president, 20 percent of those polled chose Lincoln. Reagan was picked by 15 percent, Franklin D. Roosevelt by 12 percent, John F. Kennedy by 11 percent, Bill Clinton (news - web sites) by 10 percent and George W. Bush by 8 percent. Washington was picked by 6 percent.

In the CNN-USA Today-Gallup poll, Reagan had 20 percent, followed by Clinton and Lincoln in the mid-teens and then Roosevelt and Kennedy at 12 percent.

more at

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&ncid=536&e=5&u=/ap/20050221/ap_on_go_pr_wh/rating_presidents


EDITED to meet 4-paragraph limit. Article notes that college poll found young people have sketchy information about George Washington.

Also note that while Reagan was first in the CNN/USA Gallup poll, Lincoln was first in the Washington College poll.

Let me stab myself between the eyes with an ice pick.
God this country is filled with flippin' morons.

In 20 years, I'm sure they'll be listing George W. Bush as the greatest of all time.

Two men who did more damage to America then their predecessor combined- all while draping themselves in the flag.

I guess I always assumed people considered Washington the greatest president.

-wildflower

Probably due to Gallup's tendancy to oversample Republicans.

If there were a poll for the best VP's these same idiots would place Dan Quayle rather high.

near the bottom of all of them. Bet it really pisses him off that Clinton beat him in every one!!!!

who picked him as the best? Even if you voted for him, I don't know how you could possibly rate him the best. Some measure of reality has to set in!

"christian" leader! That's why they overlook everything he does, and every scandal that is reported about him. Same people who love PAt Robertson, Jerry Fallwell, and the good old Jim Baker!

Republicans can't think of any great presidents of the past so they pick Reagan.

Democrats can't think of any great presidents of the past, so a big chunk choose Clinton.

A sad state of affairs.

But that is because the farther back you go the more unacceptable actions the president committed. And no I don't feel I need to judge them by the standards of their day.

FDR did a great many things and he might get it normally except for the whole being very anti asian thing including Japanese Internment camps. That keeps him from being #1 IMO.

I'm going to hurl.

<speechless>

people vote what they know. Ask the same group to name all the presidents and most wouldn't be able to list many more outside the second half of the 20th century.

The Washington College poll seems more reasonable.

Washington College Poll:
Liberal:
12 percent Franklin D. Roosevelt
11 percent John F. Kennedy
10 percent Bill Clinton
---
33 Pct

Debatable (but liberal in my opinion, for their time):
20 percent Lincoln.
6 percent Washington
---
26 Pct

Conservative:
15 percent Reagan
8 percent George W. Bush
---
23 Pct


CNN Poll
Liberal:
Clinton 15 % (at least "mid teens")
FDR 12%
JFK 12%
-----
39%

Debatable (but liberal in my opinion):
Lincoln 15 % (at least "mid teens")

Conservative:
Reagan 20 %

Liberals win handily, in both polls.

puhleez

It's that simple. Reagan was in the news a lot last year with his death, so I'm sure that weighs on the mind of many people. Both Clinton and Bush are on it because they're the most recent presidents. I mean, c'mon Clinton was a average to below average president at best....no reason for either one of them to be in the top 5.

But you are right, there is a recency effect. These types of contests are heavily weighted to the recent past. It is like the "best songs of the 20th century" countdowns, which were noticeably lacking in much material before 1955, and heavily weighted towards the last few decades. Just human nature, I guess, but good to keep in mind when anyone makes too much of these lists.

Clinton doesn't belong on the list of greats, but he was certainly above average, based on his economic record alone. He undoubtedly left the country in better shape than when he took over, which is the mark of a successful president.

The economy is a trend of highs and lows. A president probably can deter economic growth with his policies. I guess they can possibly change the economy for the better, if they enact radical changes. However Clinton didn't do that. The economy only boomed because of technology and the internet, hardly anything Clinton did. In fact the growth of the economy started in late 1992, months before Clinton became president.

Maybe below average isn't correct, but he wasn't above average at all.

as helping spur economic growth by tackling the deficit in a serious way. I still say that because the country was in better shape when he left office, he should be considered successful and at least somewhat above average.

The economy began turning around in mid-1992, during the presidential campaign. At the time it was a subtle change, but by the end of 1992 the economy was starting to rise quickly. Whether Bush, Perot, or Clinton had won the election the economy was heading in the right direction.

I'll give credit to Clinton for fixing the budget, but not for the economy.

But reagan? Come on, in terms of republicans I vastly prefer teddy roosevelt. You could atleast choose someone from your own party who a degree of people from the other party don't think was a joke.

Then again, he was a former actor. I guess america just loves people who tell it how it isn't, but looks like it could be.

Figures.