|
In political science, historical rankings of Presidents of the United States are surveys conducted in order to construct rankings of the success of individuals who have served as President of the United States. Ranking systems are usually based on surveys of academic historians and political scientists or popular opinion. The rankings focus on the presidential achievements, leadership qualities, failures and faults.〔Schlesinger, Arthur M. "Historians Rate the U.S. Presidents" ''Life'' November 1, 1948: 65-66, 68, 73-74.〕〔William J. Ridings, Jr., and Stuart B. McIver "Rating the Presidents: A Ranking of U.S. leaders, from the Great and Honorable to the Dishonest and Incompetent" (2000, ISBN 0806521511)(''Google Books Link'' )〕〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Americans Say Reagan Is the Greatest U.S. President )〕 ==General findings== Franklin D. Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and George Washington are consistently ranked at the top of the lists. Often ranked just below those Presidents are Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt. The remaining places in the top ten are often rounded out by Harry S. Truman, Woodrow Wilson, Dwight D. Eisenhower, James K. Polk, and Andrew Jackson. Presidents such as John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton tend to be rated among the greatest in public opinion polls, but do not always rank as highly among presidential scholars and historians. The bottom ten often includes Andrew Johnson, Franklin Pierce, Warren G. Harding, Millard Fillmore, James Buchanan, Herbert Hoover, Zachary Taylor, John Tyler, and George W. Bush. Because William Henry Harrison (32 days) and James A. Garfield (200 days, incapacitated after 119 days) both died shortly after taking office, they are sometimes omitted from presidential rankings. Zachary Taylor also died after serving as president for only 16 months, but is usually included. In the case of these three, it is not clear if they received low rankings due to their actions as president, or because each was president for such a limited time that it is not possible to assess them more thoroughly. Political scientist Walter Dean Burnham noted the "dichotomous or schizoid profiles" of presidents, which can make some hard to classify. Historian Alan Brinkley said, "There are presidents who could be considered both failures and great or near great (for example, Nixon)". James MacGregor Burns observed of Nixon, "How can one evaluate such an idiosyncratic president, so brilliant and so morally lacking?"〔Skidmore 2001〕 David H. Donald, noted biographer of Lincoln, relates that when he met John F. Kennedy in 1961, Kennedy voiced his deep dissatisfaction and resentment with historians who had rated some of his predecessors. Kennedy said, "No one has a right to grade a President—even poor James Buchanan—who has not sat in his chair, examined the mail and information that came across his desk, and learned why he made his decisions."〔Donald, David H., ''Lincoln'', 1995, p. 13〕 Historian and political scientist Julian E. Zelizer argues that traditional presidential rankings explain little concerning actual presidential history, and that they are "weak mechanisms for evaluating what has taken place in the White House."〔Zelizer (February 21, 2011), (What's wrong with presidential rankings ), CNN Opinion〕 Political commentator Ivan Eland wrote a book entitled ''Recarving Rushmore'' (2008; updated 2014) in which he wrote that historians' criteria often poorly reflect a president's actual service to the country; in the book, Eland chose to rate 40 US presidents on the basis of whether their policies promoted prosperity, liberty, and non-interventionism, as well as a modest executive role for themselves; his final rankings varied significantly from those of most scholars. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Historical rankings of Presidents of the United States」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|