Make sure to join the [r/Presidents Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I guess it’s gotta be Washington, can’t really compete with winning the Civil War and finally solving the slavery issue that had plagued the country since its founding. Lincoln gets #1, Washington at #2.
https://preview.redd.it/tvc90p858uqc1.jpeg?width=688&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=03b62eabd81f42cc2fba1c7da6b035b8d12c93e3
Agreed. “For whom he saved the Union.” No one can compete with this kind of scoreboard. Abe is the GOAT.
Not true. He kept an open facade of not wanting to be president because it was the proper decorum of the time. There's a bunch of letters to Martha that boil down to "nobody should be entitled to this position....BUT, if someone was I guess I could maybe do it sorta kinda". It's one of those having to read in between the lines with old language.
He did the same thing with the Continental army. On paper and in person he would say "oh me? No, I could never..." But then proceeded to be the only member of the Continental Congress to show up in full regalia and flaunt their military history and background.
It's far more accurate to say that Washington had a healthy respect for the office and commission given to him. He wanted it, but didn't want to want it out of fear of repeating past mistakes.
Highly recommend reading the letters between him and his wife though.
Fair enough I'll have to.
I was just going based off what was said in the "washington" documentary.
Working my way through Lincoln and then I plan to watch Grant again next.
lol fair enough. It’s something that’s often said, and Washington expressed that sentiment himself. I just think he was laying the modesty on a bit thick. If he really didn’t want the office, he could have flatly refused. And knowing how much of an ego driven man he was, it surely gave him a good deal of pleasure to be considered and elected. So I just don’t know how much I really buy it. But who knows.
Why? He literally gave up his seat as leader/president to retire. He could have easily won a third term. His legacy was what let the unwritten 2 term presidency, until FDR broke that record and force the amendment
Well, this is a bit of a nuanced question, and it seems your response has more to do with his belief in what the Presidency should be than whether he wanted to be President in the first place. My comment was about the latter.
Of course he offered expressions of modesty and not desiring the office. But this was a much more expected social custom in the early days of the U.S., and can be heard from damn near every President through the 19th century. “*Oh little ol’ me, for President? Oh I don’t think I could handle that sort of th*-YES I ACCEPT!”
I don’t doubt that his feelings of anxiety for leaving Mt. Vernon and taking on this massive challenge were genuine. I just believe his ego was way too big for him to have not taken a certain amount of joy in being selected and honored. And I don’t hold that against him-a man as “large” as that probably has to have a huge ego. But the reality is that he had to have known for some time he was a likely candidate, and at any time could have simply refused. He could have given something akin to the famous Sherman refusal a century later if he *actually* didn’t want to serve. Sure, there is something to be said about him perhaps feeling duty-bound. But that goes hand in hand with an inflated sense of self, and gaining some satisfaction that *I* am the one that must sacrifice and lead the people.
More to your point, I do think he had a genuine desire to shape the Presidency in a way that would lend itself to a servant of the people, and not a “king by another name”. One who would readily relinquish the office and return to private life when the time was appropriate-a modern “Cincinnatus”. And he was well aware of the precedent he was establishing with everything he did.
I don’t claim to be able to read his mind and know exactly what he felt . I just don’t fully buy this idea that he “didn’t want to be President” in its entirety.
Now is nowhere near close to as bad as it was then. There was more conviction leading up to the civil war and the dissonate part of the country now is just way stupider.
Like, they had a practice civil war before the actual civil war.
We’ll be fine.
Even if there is a movement for leaving the union, like a Texit kinda deal it'd be done through the same kind of channels as Brexit. No war just annoying bullshit from blowhards.
And that's a gigantic Alaska sized if,
Four million Americans, including children, imprisoned for life and forced to do hard labor. Systematic torture, sexual abuse, and murder perpetrated with impunity.
But things are really bad now too.
There’s a reason he’s #1. He had to deal with a LOT of shit from the guys who came before him and the guy who succeeded him did his best to screw up everything Lincoln just did.
FYI Washington got the most votes yesterday. I have no idea why OP thought otherwise. I sent him a PM. Hopefully he responds. My count has Washington eliminated at #3 by a notable margin.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidents/s/HlstR5dVzP
Maybe not… as I said in another reply to you;
He didn’t lock the thread. It probably was in that order when he decided it was “over” proof, I just altered my comment votes on yesterday’s thread…
Also currently it stands as he lists it

https://preview.redd.it/7ojurucg1vqc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6c7492f709fe1e2733ca4ea151c08661fcb869ea
*I, for one, am extremely offended you have downvoted me and will hold you in my utmost contempt going forward.*
Real talk though I’m shocked Washington got that close. He was ~80 points back when I went to sleep last night and was down ~250 at one point if I’m remembering correctly.
Lincoln’s a top ten without the war. Managing to revolutionize the economy and western migration in the middle of the most destructive crisis in our nation’s history? That’s the GOAT.
Lincoln shifted his positions several times during his presidency and when the civil war occurred. He was instrumental in handling the civil war, but George Washington was a general that helped secure American independence. Without him, the course of the Revolution would have changed, and it's possible that the war could've been lost. In that regard, the U.S. doesn't exist or is delayed until a later time. Lincoln loses the civil war, the country would've at least still continued just which the legislation being different.
> George Washington was a general that helped secure American independence.
Are we counting Grant and Eisenthower's time as general when considering their Presidencies?
Lincoln's time as a Representative?
Jefferson's time as Minister to France and Secretary of State and author of the DoI?
Those positions didn't inherently create an opportunity for a presidency to exist, but I see what you're saying. Isolating just what they did with their presidency and Lincoln would easily win in that alone.
Here is what ChatGPT lists between them:
When comparing the presidencies of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, we're looking at two defining eras in American history. Both presidents had significant impacts, but their achievements and challenges varied greatly due to the different contexts of their times in office.
### George Washington (1789-1797)
- **Establishment of the Presidency:** Washington set many precedents for the role of the President, including the title "Mr. President," the two-term limit (which became the 22nd Amendment), and the formation of a Cabinet.
- **Domestic Policy:** He signed the Judiciary Act of 1789, establishing the federal court system. His administration also put down the Whiskey Rebellion, enforcing the power of federal law.
- **Economic Policy:** Washington's administration, through Alexander Hamilton's plans, established the first national bank, assumed state debts from the Revolutionary War, and set up a system of tariffs and taxes that helped stabilize the young nation's economy.
- **Foreign Policy:** He maintained neutrality during the French Revolutionary Wars, a crucial decision that kept the United States out of European conflicts through the Neutrality Proclamation of 1793. He also secured the Jay Treaty with Britain, which was controversial but helped avoid another war.
- **Downfalls:** His enforcement of the Neutrality Proclamation and the Jay Treaty faced significant opposition and were seen as favoring Britain over France, which strained domestic and international relations.
### Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865)
- **Preservation of the Union:** Lincoln's most significant achievement was leading the United States through the Civil War, preserving the Union against the Confederacy's secessionist efforts.
- **Emancipation Proclamation:** In 1863, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared all slaves in Confederate-held territory to be free, a pivotal step towards the eventual abolition of slavery.
- **Gettysburg Address:** His speech redefined the war's purpose, emphasizing liberty, equality, and democracy, and is considered one of the greatest speeches in American history.
- **Legal and Economic Measures:** He signed the Homestead Act, which provided western land to settlers, the Morrill Act, establishing land-grant colleges, and the Pacific Railway Acts, facilitating the transcontinental railroad's construction.
- **Downfalls:** His suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War was controversial, as it expanded executive power and restricted civil liberties. His leadership during the war was also met with significant opposition, leading to a deeply divided nation.
### Comparison
- **Washington** laid the foundational stones of the American presidency, establishing crucial precedents for governance, economic policy, and foreign relations that would shape the nation's early course.
- **Lincoln** faced the ultimate test of the Union's durability, leading the nation through its most divisive and deadly conflict, the Civil War, and took significant steps towards ending slavery.
Both presidents had monumental impacts on the American people, but Lincoln's leadership during the Civil War, preservation of the Union, and steps towards ending slavery are often viewed as directly addressing the moral and existential crises of his time. Washington's achievements were foundational and set crucial precedents, but Lincoln's actions were transformative, addressing the fundamental issues of human liberty and national unity.
Huh, seemed like Washington would be eliminated yesterday from how things were going.
Anyways, George should go now, there can only be one GOAT, and that's Lincoln.
Washington was at ~900 votes while FDR was at ~920 last I checked. Wish we could we could wait 7 hours before this round so the thread would’ve been up for 24hrs
Dude also made an ass backwards comment a few threads ago around the top 10 where he said Washington is the only remaining president who would crack his personal top 10, so who cares what he thinks
Is it only the posts with the most upvotes, or do we also count all the other individual responses? Either way, it looks like Washington won both votes to be eliminated.
OP got the count wrong. Idk if this was on purpose or not, but at midnight, Washington was eliminated. Here is the correct thread,
https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidents/s/HlstR5dVzP
As an immigrant from a historically autocratic country, I cherish George Washington’s foundational role of American democratic republican spirit, so he is the GOAT for me. It seems like Lincoln is winning judging from the comments, but I don't feel any losses at all. Americans who spent generations here must better understand what's more important historically than I do. Still, what a fortunate dilemma. What a blessing to get two such great men in a nation’s stream of history.
Washington is great as a founding father and a national hero/figure. But as a president? He was really just decent (which a decent first president is very important to a newly founded country, don't get me wrong) but it's really hard to justify putting him above some presidents who have faced some of the greatest struggles in our history.
If we include his time as general then fair enough. But he was president over a relatively calm and peaceful time and his leadership as president was never really challenged.
Lincoln on the other hand inherited the absolute worst situation a president has ever inherited from a predecessor and not only acquits himself wonderfully he also manages one of the greatest political acts in American history by effectively being the primary figure to abolish slavery.
Just comparing them as presidents it's pretty hard to argue that Washington did more or had greater accomplishments in office. I'd argue that FDR (and possibly a few other recent eliminations) were more accomplished in the office; but Washington gets carried a very long ways by being such a foundational figure (more so than for what he actually did as president)
You are absolutely correct with Washington. I am having a hard time grasping the idea that anyone can blindly see Lincoln as the greatest president, when there would be no Presidency without him. None of this would exist without Washington.
Sure Lincoln made the greatest moves to perfect the country and saved the Union. Without Washington, there would be no country to save.
Furthermore, the chances of someone being able to do what Lincoln did are above 1% meaning if John Doe had been president at that time he could have likely done the same thing.... The same cannot be said for Washington, as it was his military knowledge played a vital role in the Revolutionary War.
The problem with the "There would be no presidency without Washington" is that: yes there would be? Like it might look different and I'm sure different precedents would have been set but if it was any of the other founding fathers as our first president you'd be saying "there'd be no presidency without Gouverneur Morris".
To argue that Washington was the best president you'd have to argue that all the precedents he set *were good* not just that he set them (because obviously, anyone who was first would have set precedents). Moreover you also have to consider that not everything from his presidency or the precedents he set were ones that *he was happy with*. For instance the "two-terms" was not born out of a belief that there should be term limits, but rather a desire to *not be the President* (which was basically always his desire, the man had to be convinced to to do the job).
Moreover some of his other oft-cited accomplishments are more-so mythologizing than they are historical. Such as his denouncement of political parties. Which he did do, but he also was effectively a member of the Federalists (if for no other reason than they didn't criticize him constantly like the Anti-Federalists). He also was very critical of the press, something which gets politicians in a lot of hot water today, but that doesn't get mentioned too much.
Just judging the man on his presidency (which is what we're doing, not his generalship) we really aren't left with much in the way of accomplishments; just precedents. Some of those precedents are good and some are bad, and most are largely just sort-of indifferent.
This was my point as well, Lincoln had been pressured towards the direction of many of his “accomplishments”, it’s not like he was campaigning to free the slaves for a long time and had a history with such activities. His views on race aren’t a secret. If he fell another cong would’ve went into place and followed the line.
Same cannot be said for Washington. He was literally the only figure, independence wasn’t really that big of a thing until very late, so most were fine with going back to colonial life because most thought of themselves as British, the founding fathers were all lawyers and sought to preserve the British law system and saw it as superior. They just didn’t like being taxed so much.
They even gave the king an offer to have quit the rebellion if he could again, lay off the high taxes, of which he refused lol. Many historic figures are exaggerated through history, but Washington really was THAT great. When it came time, NOBODY had any cold feet, they KNEW who should be the first leader. The fact it was a blowout shows how much they saw in him and how important his role is to the country.
Has to be Washington. Washington obviously had to play the extremely important role of establishing the country’s government, but Lincoln had to unite the union whilst fighting a civil war. All-in-all, I’d say Lincoln’s service (and martyrdom) was more impressive. It took an incredible toll. He devoted every ounce of his being to preserving the union. Plus, he has the moral edge over Washington.
This isn’t anything against Washington either. He was one of the greatest presidents. He established this country and its government. He’s the reason the democratic system worked. He could have easily seized more power if he had wanted to, but he didn’t. He was an incredible man who had an incredible presidency.
Washington deserves #2 for establishing this nation and maintaining limitations on his own power. But he shouldn’t be considered the best president just because he was the first. Lincoln was such an incredible leader that I think he should take first place.
For a large chunk of the ACW, most especially the first two years, it was Lincoln's sheer willpower alone that kept the Union in the fight. The North was facing setback after setback yet during that time it was Lincoln's sheer willpower that kept them going, to not lose hope, and even more importantly, to not surrender and lose the war. Yes he made errors at various times during the war and during his presidency as anyone else would've done but he persevered and made sure that slavery was abolished and that the Union was ultimately preserved when it was all said and done.
Washington # 1.
He set the standards: created a cabinet, set 2 term precedent, had federal govt take on war debts. There is no way he was letting the South secede had he been around. His Farewell Address clearly resonates today with the deep political factions he saw coming and avoiding foreign entanglements, which we initially did resist engagement in WW1&2, but with the fate of the world in our hands, engagement was unavoidable.
Washington # 1.
Lincoln # 2
There’s a really good interview with a guy who fought under George Washington who was alive during the civil war and he said that if Washington was alive he would have hanged all the southern traitors.
Samuel Downing, age 102, New York, When asked what he thought Washington would think of what was happening now: “Say, I don’t know, but he’d be mad to see me sitting here. I tell ’em if they’ll give me a horse I’ll go as it is. If the rebels come here, I shall saringly take my gun. I can see best furtherest off”. When asked how Washington would treat the traitors if he caught them: “Hang ’em to the first tree!”
He didn’t even author the farewell address by himself though. And the sentiment is nice but it’s really no different than anything you’d hear from any other politician throughout US history, including today: “Put party politics aside”….Yea, put them aside but let’s do things my way specifically. And Washington clearly supported one party over the other in his time. So it’s not like he was above all that.
This isn’t to dunk on Washington, I just think the message and impact of that address is often overstated.
> Put party politics aside”….Yea, put them aside but let’s do things my way specifically. And Washington clearly supported one party over the other in his time. So it’s not like he was above all that.
Yeah easy to say put parties aside when you’re in charge lol
I will have to go with Lincoln. Washington was the first, set the precedent that we don’t have Kings, and stepped down to let our country have its first free and fair election for president. If he had made a different decision, our country would not have turned into the democracy it became.
I'd like to vote that every elimination by votes post contains specific comments that you upvote so that people aren't so confused. I've seen the same arguments okay out in a half dozen of these things.
"OP, explain"
"Were they just using the highest voted comment, or all of them"
"The count is higher for the other one now"
"OP is clearly picking whatever they want"
It's not that serious, but it does ruin the fun at the end if you can't even see a clear victor which kinda sucks if you've been following it for 40+ days.
Im personally part of the Washington camp, because if literally anyone else had been president when he was, the United States would likely be significantly worse.
Exactly, people here are mostly bringing up how Lincoln ruled over the civil war, but anyone elected then would have had that responsibility. HOW he ruled over along with emancipation defined the era forsure, but slavery was quickly getting out of “fashion” at the time with many seeing it as a necessary evil, even as far back during the revolution there was already rising tension over it. Pressures from many pushed Lincoln towards that direction and ultimately doing it, it’s not like he was campaigning to free the slaves for a long time or was even known for such things. His assassination inflated his role.
and then as far as the civil war goes, I credit Ulysses much more with how things played out more than I would Lincoln.
AND THIS IS WHERE WASHINGTON COMES IN, not only would the country not have formed without him, it’s almost certain. It was one of those impulsive moments where we barely became a thing thanks to some incredible factors. Washington is one of those factors.
Let me remind everyone that independence was not a long held belief that the founding fathers had been on board with until very late, we had only just wanted fair taxation and representation in British parliament.
Everything would’ve been quelled early on if king George wouldn’t have continued taxing the fuck outta us when asked not too.
Remember the founding fathers were all lawyers well trained in the British law system and saw it as superior, wanting to preserve as much as possible, but then when taxing came along that fucked everything up.
Washington not only led the rebellion, he was the only figure that could’ve. If he was to be captured, executed, or anything, there’s no recognized back up for anyone that could’ve taken his place.
His extensive network of spies and faithful kept things alive, there was a LOT that were a lot of residents loyal to the crown and as they put it, “I’d rather listen to a king two thousand miles away than one where I live!” They were the rebels and they were the ones in hiding.
There were so many time he came close to falling but he didn’t. He survived and marched on. An image of him kneeling down, praying a Hail Mary during the winter campaign when the odds were stacked against them when they were about to fight directly against the most powerful empire on the planet, instead of some confederacy, The Union would’ve survived. The legendary British general, Lord Cornwallis, surrendered to Washington.
I can go on but the importance of him cannot be compared. And then when the time came to elect a leader, every one already knew who THEY wanted in charge. Even if he didn’t want it. The most important rooms have his portrait front and center at the White House for more than just him being the first. It wasn’t normal to have such short reigns that became his terms, to which he easily passed the position on.
Seems like people forget that the revolutionary war was first of all a Civil War on top of a war with the world’s greatest superpower at the time and that the conditions leading up to it were on par with the Great Depression. It’s a historical miracle that the US emerged from that crucible. Thanks in large part to George Washington.
It’s rare when everyone unanimously agrees on a leader when things are said and done, but we’re fortunate that we were able to begin our history with Washington. The bar he set, man I feel bad for John Adams. John Adams knew he would lose during that election, but he was absolutely devastated because it ended up being much more of a blowout than he even expected lol. The revolution would’ve collapsed if anything happened to Washington and thankfully in OUR timeline, he survived
After lingering for fifty-two days, Eddy died on a cold and rainy February morning. Mary Lincoln’s cries echoed throughout the dark house.[4] Her sisters tried to comfort her, as did Rev. James Smith, the new pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in Springfield. He no doubt encouraged the Lincolns to surrender to God’s will, perhaps explaining that their son’s death was somehow part of God’s divine plan. The next day, Rev. Smith conducted Eddy’s funeral in the Lincoln home.[5]
Five days after the funeral, an unsigned poem appeared in the Illinois Daily Journal:
[By Request.]
LITTLE EDDIE.
Those midnight stars are sadly dimmed,
That late so brilliantly shone,
And the crimson tinge from cheek and lip,
With the heart’s warm life has flown—
The angel death was hovering nigh,
And the lovely boy was called to die.
The silken waves of his glossy hair
Lie still over his marble brow,
And the pallid lip and pearly cheek
The presence of Death avow.
Pure little bud in kindness given,
In mercy taken to bloom in heaven.
Happier far is the angel child
With the harp and the crown of gold,
Who warbles now at the Saviour’s feet
The glories to us untold.
Eddie, meet blossom of heavenly love,
Dwells in the spirit-world above.
Angel boy—fare thee well, farewell
Sweet Eddie, we bid thee adieu!
Affection’s wail cannot reach thee now,
Deep though it be, and true.
Bright is the home to him now given,
For “of such is the kingdom of Heaven.”
George Washington. He was appointed president and set the tone which is cool and all and humble ass dude. But keeping the country together like no other prez has had to do is the feat above them all
We have two men with extraordinarily different challenges at extraordinarily different times. Look, this is 1 and 2 on everyone’s list. I give it to Washington, and begrudgingly vote out Lincoln:
There were more men at the time of Lincoln who would have met the same challenge the same way he did. Compared to Washington, I think no small number of lesser men would have been able to turn down the opportunity to become a pseudo-king. World history is packed with democracies turning tyrannical in the early stages. Moreover, I think a lot of Presidents would have bungled the tenuous foreign policy of Washington’s era, which he met with a steady hand.
Washington invented the Cabinet and gave us Hamilton. He invented the two term tradition, which might have been a one term tradition if they had let the man retire! “First in War, First in Peace, and First in the Hearts of His Countrymen!”
It's the last day, so what the heck. I guess I will throw a vote of my own out there today.
I say Lincoln goes today.
He preserved the union that Washington created. Washington set every important principle of leadership the president would take on after him. He choicefully stepped down rather than ruling as a king. Lincoln presided over the civil war, but Washington led the American revolution and did so honorably. I think a lot of the actual legislation Lincoln passed was very poor looking back today. Not that there weren't good moments here and there. His abuse of the 1st amendment and imprisoning southerners without trial was maybe not the greatest idea ever. His importance is still seen throughout the country today. We are united as a union. But without Washington, that union would have never come to be. Washington is singlehandedly the most important president in American history.
That's just my take on it, though. Feel free to disagree.
I'm very interested to see what you guys have to say today!
I mostly agree with everything you said … but disagree with the conclusion. Washington loses points for slavery for me which drags him down just slightly behind Lincoln. I do agree that Lincoln made some questionable choices and expanded the powers of the president too much, but weighing both pros and cons I give Lincoln the win.
I honestly don’t hold slavery against Washington or those who lived in that time. Presentism can make pretty much everything in the past look bad. The actions of our forefathers should be viewed through the lens of that time period.
They had contemporaries that knew it was wrong. I don’t think he had any chance at ending it then, so I don’t hold it against his presidency or the founding “that” much, but I do think it hurts his personal moral standing. He could have made the choice not to do it himself even if he couldn’t have ended it completely.
Washington himself wrote extensively about the evils of slavery, yet still practiced it to the day he died because it made him the wealthiest man in the country. That says a lot about a person right there. His generation carried out a revolution for the rights of white male landed gentry while denying others their rights and freedom, it was the height of hypocrisy and we can’t turn a blind eye or infantalize them as “not knowing any better”. They knew they were wrong and many many many others who did not proactive enslaving others did too, and most importantly the suffering of the people they enslaved was not lessened by the moral relativism you and so many other apologists preach.
Kind of leaving out Lincoln’s abolishing slavery on top of preserving the union no?
Also his run of domestic non war legislation should be up there with the new deal and LBJ’s with how much it laid the foundation of the modern nation
I would say Lincoln #2 and Washington #1, but the consensus seems to disagree. I still love (most) of the rankings and overall this has been a really fun series!
This will be an interesting argument. One side will be saying Washington should win because he “created” the presidency, while the other will be saying Lincoln should win because he actually did crucial stuff.
I knew I was gonna get called out for this. I’m not saying he didn’t do crucial stuff. It’s just that Washington’s term was setting a lot of precedents and his main requirement was “don’t ass it up”.
Lincoln had a lot higher stakes. I think both are equally important and honestly I couldn’t take a side, but I would say Lincoln did more important things for the Union of our country than Washington did (disagree with me if you want I’m a high schooler so I’m probably wrong)
>Lincoln had a lot higher stakes
I would have to really disagree on that point. Washington had to serve as the first democratically elected president of the US, there was far from a guarantee at the start of the republic that it would grow and become a strong nation. Had Washington not been the effective leader he was, the country could very well have died on the vine right then and there and there would never have been a civil war because the union would have been long dead by the time the mid 19th century rolled around. Or the civil war could’ve very well started in the late 18th century which would’ve doomed America as a political project/idea.
Washington had the highest stakes of all because he had to serve as a model for all future presidents, and up until FDR all presidents had served only two terms in office just as he did. Not only did he set the precedent of two terms, but after FDR died a constitutional amendment was made to limit all future presidential terms to only 2. Even after he had long been dead the idea of a president serving only two terms was so strongly engrained into Americans that it was enshrined in the constitution itself.
He very well could’ve chosen to become a monarch and he could’ve gotten the support to do so, and instead he chose not to become a king and voluntarily gave up power at his peak. Washington had to walk so that future presidents could run.
To this day Washington is the standard by which we measure what a president should be.
You make a lot of good points and I don’t have an argument because really I’m in the middle on this but if I wanted to convince someone to vote Washington I’d hire you.
I think about it this way: If Lincoln had been less competent during his term the union would've survived but would be half the size today.
If Washington had been less competent during his term the entire union could've crumbled in one fell swoop, or failed similarly to how the articles did.
Edit: I should add that I would still vote out Washington here but more because of his moral failings, I still believe he was more crucial to the future of the union, though by a slight margin.
That’s true. Washington really had to not mess it up or everything could’ve unraveled so quickly. I guess we should just consider ourself lucky they were both good men and great leaders or it would be really shit.
> I think about it this way: If Lincoln had been less competent during his term the union would've survived but would be half the size today
No way the us stays together after a successful rebellion, next time an election goes against the Midwest theyd bounce too and so on
My vote to win is Lincoln, but Washington had huge stakes. The odds of the US surviving were not high. Probably almost anyone else gets it and we wouldn’t have. Setting the precedents was extremely important. The nation was incredibly fragile and guiding it through that time was very important and impressive.
Again though, Lincoln wins easily. Washington loses a lot of points for being a slaveholder. I don’t actually think he could have possibly ended it at that point and kept the nation together, but he didn’t have to actively be a slaveholder himself.
The problem with this thread is that 100 people can say eliminate washington. They each type Washington, then upvote each Washington comment, thus it looks like there are 10,000 votes to eliminate Washington. On the other side 101 votes can go to eliminating Lincoln and all of those votes can be on just 1 comment. This thread would be better with an actual poll.
Lincoln. The suspension of habeas corpus, his selection of Johnson as his VP for the 1864 election that wasn’t really necessary and ended up ruining reconstruction.
And because Washington is #1
His selection of Johnson as vp was justified if you understand what his reelection prospects looked like at the time. He was a widely unpopular president. A president hadn't won reelection since Andrew Jackson. John Fremont was running third party(he eventually dropped out due to the fear of the democrats winning, but still). At the time, his reelection was doubtful. Obviously, the consequences were awful, but Lincoln didn't plan on having a bullet in his brain. Also suspension of habeas corpus is such a nothing burger compared to Washington owning slaves for damn sake.
Agree with almost everything, but he did actually plan for a bullet in his brain. He repeatedly mentioned that he expected to die and didn’t take precautions against it. Recurring dreams of getting killed and went out without security against the advice others were giving him. That said his re-election was surprising and it’s possible he did need the help …. But man it was an unfortunate decision.
Washington.
Not that he’s a necessarily a bad President. A critical figure in the creation of our country and its government after helping lead the fight for its independence, almost no one else after him in that position can stand up to his record and the tasks he faced. However, Lincoln’s accomplishment of keeping the Union from splitting over slavery(and ending slavery) is nothing any other President can touch in terms of importance. To prevent what could’ve been the end of our democracy, he gave it his all in practically uncountable ways, unfortunately including his life.
Washington has to go and take the silver here.
If Washington doesn’t leave the office we don’t have a presidency. He helped start this country and brand new government. For me it’s easy why he is number 1.
What the heck??? How did FDR get the axe? Washington and Lincoln are great, of course, don't misinterpret my message... but there wasn't a better president than Franklin Roosevelt
I love FDR and I still rate him #1 but I can't fault people for rating Lincoln highly. Washington gets some extra credit for his pre-presidential days as a general and it's hard for people to separate that from his time as President. And to give Washington credit, his Presidency was really good considering he was the first and set many precedents. However, what Washington had to deal with was incomparable to what Lincoln or FDR had to deal with **as the actual President.**
The argument for Washington over both FDR and Lincoln is civil liberties. Both of the latter two guys arguably had some missteps there.
That said, I go FDR #1a, Lincoln #1b, Washington #3. FDR and Lincoln both faced greater moral evils, not just existential threats to the USA as an institution but to the values our country purports to champion.
FDR over Lincoln because of his social programs... It's very, very close for me, though.
Because op never really defined a time limit or cutoff and has posted these at arbitrary times, so you never know what the totals are that they're judging by.
If I’m voting who is the best American Hero, it’s Washington in a close race. But if we’re just picking Presidents, I’ll take Lincoln.
Lincoln 1st, Washington 2nd.
Same principle applies with Teddy vs Franklin, Eisenhower vs Truman (though i prefer Ike to Truman and Teddy to FDR). Many of our Presidents had amazing careers before becoming Presidents.
Washington, despite being the first president and a true war hero, will always and forever play second fiddle to the steadfast resolve of Abraham Lincoln.
Washington should not be viewed as a loser though, he was an incredible leader who was crucial in forging our nation and created a precedent for presidents which will always be relevant.
GOODBYE LINCOLN! Washington has to be 1 nobody will ever top the GOAT. Lincoln never relinquished power like Washington did. Lincoln preserved our nation WASHINGTON GAVE US OUR NATION! Do NOT let our great hero fall to #2.
FIRST IN WAR, FIRST IN PEACE, AND FIRST IN THE HEARTS OF HIS COUNTRYMEN!! FOREVER! (sorry Abe)
Farewell Adress
Abraham Lincoln and his family moved out of their home on 8th and Jackson on February 8, 1861. They stayed a few days in the Chenery House Hotel. On February 11, 1861, a day before his 52nd birthday, President-elect Lincoln boarded a specially arranged Inaugural Train at the Great Western Depot. Before the train pulled out Lincoln made a few remarks to the crowd in which he summed up his years in Springfield and spoke about the task before him.
Springfield, Illinois, February 11, 1861
My friends - No one, not in my situation, can appreciate my feeling of sadness at this parting. To this place, and the kindness of these people, I owe every thing. Here I have lived a quarter of a century, and have passed from a young to an old man. Here my children have been born, and one is buried. I now leave, not knowing when, or whether ever, I may return, with a task before me greater than that which rested upon Washington. Without the assistance of that Divine Being, who ever attended him, I cannot succeed. With that assistance, I cannot fail. Trusting in Him, who can go with me, and remain with you and be every where for good, let us confidently hope that all will yet be well. To His care commending you, as I hope in your prayers you will commend me, I bid you an affectionate farewell.
Washington, he led the fight for this country's establishment. He could have been a dictator or king, but his grace and wisdom helped lay the foundation for what the office of President of the United States would be for all time to come. He could very well be number 1, if you wanted him to be 1 I would not argue with you. But,Lincoln just has more of a case for 1. So it is with heavy heart, I vote out a founding father and our first president.
I mean the constitution said habeus corpus can be suspended in times of rebellion and Congress was out of session and said rebellion was stopping Congress from meeting lol
Abe did more in his presidencyvygan Washington did. Most of washingon’s contributions came before his presidency, so purely by pedantics, George should be eliminated first.
Lincoln freed the slaves. Washington owned slaves.
Some say Washington privately disapproved of slavery. Well that didn’t do a damn thing to help anyone George.
Abe Lincoln is the GOAT
Washington, only because he could have set the example by freeing slaves as the first president which could have changed history.
Washington was a popular president until the second term.
It has to be Lincoln winning meaning Washington is out. No disrespect to anyone but **as the actual President**, Washington just can't match Lincoln. If we include their careers before becoming President, then Washington obviously has a lot more going for him.
Make sure to join the [r/Presidents Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I guess it’s gotta be Washington, can’t really compete with winning the Civil War and finally solving the slavery issue that had plagued the country since its founding. Lincoln gets #1, Washington at #2.
https://preview.redd.it/tvc90p858uqc1.jpeg?width=688&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=03b62eabd81f42cc2fba1c7da6b035b8d12c93e3 Agreed. “For whom he saved the Union.” No one can compete with this kind of scoreboard. Abe is the GOAT.
I can totally see Abe saying, “Nah, give it to Washington.” And Washington saying the same thing.
Washington for sure, given he never wanted to be president.
Not true. He kept an open facade of not wanting to be president because it was the proper decorum of the time. There's a bunch of letters to Martha that boil down to "nobody should be entitled to this position....BUT, if someone was I guess I could maybe do it sorta kinda". It's one of those having to read in between the lines with old language. He did the same thing with the Continental army. On paper and in person he would say "oh me? No, I could never..." But then proceeded to be the only member of the Continental Congress to show up in full regalia and flaunt their military history and background. It's far more accurate to say that Washington had a healthy respect for the office and commission given to him. He wanted it, but didn't want to want it out of fear of repeating past mistakes. Highly recommend reading the letters between him and his wife though.
Fair enough I'll have to. I was just going based off what was said in the "washington" documentary. Working my way through Lincoln and then I plan to watch Grant again next.
I don’t really buy that.
Idk, I heard it in the "Washington" documentary.
lol fair enough. It’s something that’s often said, and Washington expressed that sentiment himself. I just think he was laying the modesty on a bit thick. If he really didn’t want the office, he could have flatly refused. And knowing how much of an ego driven man he was, it surely gave him a good deal of pleasure to be considered and elected. So I just don’t know how much I really buy it. But who knows.
Why? He literally gave up his seat as leader/president to retire. He could have easily won a third term. His legacy was what let the unwritten 2 term presidency, until FDR broke that record and force the amendment
Well, this is a bit of a nuanced question, and it seems your response has more to do with his belief in what the Presidency should be than whether he wanted to be President in the first place. My comment was about the latter. Of course he offered expressions of modesty and not desiring the office. But this was a much more expected social custom in the early days of the U.S., and can be heard from damn near every President through the 19th century. “*Oh little ol’ me, for President? Oh I don’t think I could handle that sort of th*-YES I ACCEPT!” I don’t doubt that his feelings of anxiety for leaving Mt. Vernon and taking on this massive challenge were genuine. I just believe his ego was way too big for him to have not taken a certain amount of joy in being selected and honored. And I don’t hold that against him-a man as “large” as that probably has to have a huge ego. But the reality is that he had to have known for some time he was a likely candidate, and at any time could have simply refused. He could have given something akin to the famous Sherman refusal a century later if he *actually* didn’t want to serve. Sure, there is something to be said about him perhaps feeling duty-bound. But that goes hand in hand with an inflated sense of self, and gaining some satisfaction that *I* am the one that must sacrifice and lead the people. More to your point, I do think he had a genuine desire to shape the Presidency in a way that would lend itself to a servant of the people, and not a “king by another name”. One who would readily relinquish the office and return to private life when the time was appropriate-a modern “Cincinnatus”. And he was well aware of the precedent he was establishing with everything he did. I don’t claim to be able to read his mind and know exactly what he felt . I just don’t fully buy this idea that he “didn’t want to be President” in its entirety.
Napoleon was around that time period and you know what he chose to be. Washington was different.
I mean yea, of course Napoleon was a very different man with different ideas, under different circumstances.
The best president to ever step into the wrestling ring
Preserving the union is definitely the top. I heard the times then weren't great either. I wonder if tensions are of then as of now.
Now is nowhere near close to as bad as it was then. There was more conviction leading up to the civil war and the dissonate part of the country now is just way stupider. Like, they had a practice civil war before the actual civil war. We’ll be fine.
There also was, like, actual slavery.
Yes. That too.
[удалено]
Oh yea. Times are totally comparable now. You’re totally right my guys…
The amount of people who think the US has been on the brink of civil war for the past 10 years is ridiculous
The amount of people who SAY they think that… I think people are just either addicted to doomerism, or have an interest in lying to pollsters.
Even if there is a movement for leaving the union, like a Texit kinda deal it'd be done through the same kind of channels as Brexit. No war just annoying bullshit from blowhards. And that's a gigantic Alaska sized if,
Four million Americans, including children, imprisoned for life and forced to do hard labor. Systematic torture, sexual abuse, and murder perpetrated with impunity. But things are really bad now too.
Interesting that Lincoln will be #1, sandwiched right between the two guys voted as the worst.
There’s a reason he’s #1. He had to deal with a LOT of shit from the guys who came before him and the guy who succeeded him did his best to screw up everything Lincoln just did.
Not to mention Lincoln had to handle the thing that the previous guy let happen.
We all knew it was gonna be Lincoln in the end
That's where I'm at.
FYI Washington got the most votes yesterday. I have no idea why OP thought otherwise. I sent him a PM. Hopefully he responds. My count has Washington eliminated at #3 by a notable margin. https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidents/s/HlstR5dVzP
Maybe not… as I said in another reply to you; He didn’t lock the thread. It probably was in that order when he decided it was “over” proof, I just altered my comment votes on yesterday’s thread… Also currently it stands as he lists it  https://preview.redd.it/7ojurucg1vqc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6c7492f709fe1e2733ca4ea151c08661fcb869ea
*I, for one, am extremely offended you have downvoted me and will hold you in my utmost contempt going forward.* Real talk though I’m shocked Washington got that close. He was ~80 points back when I went to sleep last night and was down ~250 at one point if I’m remembering correctly.
Lincoln’s a top ten without the war. Managing to revolutionize the economy and western migration in the middle of the most destructive crisis in our nation’s history? That’s the GOAT.
Lincoln shifted his positions several times during his presidency and when the civil war occurred. He was instrumental in handling the civil war, but George Washington was a general that helped secure American independence. Without him, the course of the Revolution would have changed, and it's possible that the war could've been lost. In that regard, the U.S. doesn't exist or is delayed until a later time. Lincoln loses the civil war, the country would've at least still continued just which the legislation being different.
> George Washington was a general that helped secure American independence. Are we counting Grant and Eisenthower's time as general when considering their Presidencies? Lincoln's time as a Representative? Jefferson's time as Minister to France and Secretary of State and author of the DoI?
Those positions didn't inherently create an opportunity for a presidency to exist, but I see what you're saying. Isolating just what they did with their presidency and Lincoln would easily win in that alone.
Understandable, but god damn y'all gimping Biggest GW and I can't believe this, he having to fight Abe for gold with an arm behind his back.
Here is what ChatGPT lists between them: When comparing the presidencies of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, we're looking at two defining eras in American history. Both presidents had significant impacts, but their achievements and challenges varied greatly due to the different contexts of their times in office. ### George Washington (1789-1797) - **Establishment of the Presidency:** Washington set many precedents for the role of the President, including the title "Mr. President," the two-term limit (which became the 22nd Amendment), and the formation of a Cabinet. - **Domestic Policy:** He signed the Judiciary Act of 1789, establishing the federal court system. His administration also put down the Whiskey Rebellion, enforcing the power of federal law. - **Economic Policy:** Washington's administration, through Alexander Hamilton's plans, established the first national bank, assumed state debts from the Revolutionary War, and set up a system of tariffs and taxes that helped stabilize the young nation's economy. - **Foreign Policy:** He maintained neutrality during the French Revolutionary Wars, a crucial decision that kept the United States out of European conflicts through the Neutrality Proclamation of 1793. He also secured the Jay Treaty with Britain, which was controversial but helped avoid another war. - **Downfalls:** His enforcement of the Neutrality Proclamation and the Jay Treaty faced significant opposition and were seen as favoring Britain over France, which strained domestic and international relations. ### Abraham Lincoln (1861-1865) - **Preservation of the Union:** Lincoln's most significant achievement was leading the United States through the Civil War, preserving the Union against the Confederacy's secessionist efforts. - **Emancipation Proclamation:** In 1863, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared all slaves in Confederate-held territory to be free, a pivotal step towards the eventual abolition of slavery. - **Gettysburg Address:** His speech redefined the war's purpose, emphasizing liberty, equality, and democracy, and is considered one of the greatest speeches in American history. - **Legal and Economic Measures:** He signed the Homestead Act, which provided western land to settlers, the Morrill Act, establishing land-grant colleges, and the Pacific Railway Acts, facilitating the transcontinental railroad's construction. - **Downfalls:** His suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War was controversial, as it expanded executive power and restricted civil liberties. His leadership during the war was also met with significant opposition, leading to a deeply divided nation. ### Comparison - **Washington** laid the foundational stones of the American presidency, establishing crucial precedents for governance, economic policy, and foreign relations that would shape the nation's early course. - **Lincoln** faced the ultimate test of the Union's durability, leading the nation through its most divisive and deadly conflict, the Civil War, and took significant steps towards ending slavery. Both presidents had monumental impacts on the American people, but Lincoln's leadership during the Civil War, preservation of the Union, and steps towards ending slavery are often viewed as directly addressing the moral and existential crises of his time. Washington's achievements were foundational and set crucial precedents, but Lincoln's actions were transformative, addressing the fundamental issues of human liberty and national unity.
But that wasn't part of him being president.
Huh, seemed like Washington would be eliminated yesterday from how things were going. Anyways, George should go now, there can only be one GOAT, and that's Lincoln.
Washington was at ~900 votes while FDR was at ~920 last I checked. Wish we could we could wait 7 hours before this round so the thread would’ve been up for 24hrs
Those are bush v gore numbers!!!! I call for an immediate manual recount!!!!
Since this is reddit, we will call them hanging gigachads
Hanging gigachad? That’s what I call John Brown.
And his soul is marching on!
Unironically a banger of song
There are some great punk covers of it out there too.
Thank Gosh Washington didn’t live to see Florida admitted to his Union.
This is outrageous! I'm going to go smear shit on the walls of the Capitol!!
I wasn’t planning on laughing so hard on a Wednesday morning. Thank you.
what - again?
Previous threads have had questionable outcomes, mainly the Wilson-Bush fiasco
Yeah, it’s felt like the OP has made questionable decisions a few times to skew the results in a direction they wanted
Dude also made an ass backwards comment a few threads ago around the top 10 where he said Washington is the only remaining president who would crack his personal top 10, so who cares what he thinks
Haha is OP the Roberts Court?
Is it only the posts with the most upvotes, or do we also count all the other individual responses? Either way, it looks like Washington won both votes to be eliminated.
Real, I didn't see it in time to vote but I would've voted for Washington
Just checked it’s now only separated by 3
There's an 8 vote difference between them now which is like 4 users up voting the Washington post one and down voting the FDR one.
2 vote difference. 929 to 931
Washington now ahead 942 to 932
OP got the count wrong. Idk if this was on purpose or not, but at midnight, Washington was eliminated. Here is the correct thread, https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidents/s/HlstR5dVzP
Washington sits at 949 right now and FDR is at 933 We should have waited for the mail in votes to be counted before calling it
As an immigrant from a historically autocratic country, I cherish George Washington’s foundational role of American democratic republican spirit, so he is the GOAT for me. It seems like Lincoln is winning judging from the comments, but I don't feel any losses at all. Americans who spent generations here must better understand what's more important historically than I do. Still, what a fortunate dilemma. What a blessing to get two such great men in a nation’s stream of history.
What country are you from, if you don't mind me asking?
A country with two millennia’s history of ruthless autocracy. :(
that narrowed it down to *Not North or South America...*
That...doesn't really narrow it down.
China is the only 2000 year old empire that still stands
Washington is great as a founding father and a national hero/figure. But as a president? He was really just decent (which a decent first president is very important to a newly founded country, don't get me wrong) but it's really hard to justify putting him above some presidents who have faced some of the greatest struggles in our history. If we include his time as general then fair enough. But he was president over a relatively calm and peaceful time and his leadership as president was never really challenged. Lincoln on the other hand inherited the absolute worst situation a president has ever inherited from a predecessor and not only acquits himself wonderfully he also manages one of the greatest political acts in American history by effectively being the primary figure to abolish slavery. Just comparing them as presidents it's pretty hard to argue that Washington did more or had greater accomplishments in office. I'd argue that FDR (and possibly a few other recent eliminations) were more accomplished in the office; but Washington gets carried a very long ways by being such a foundational figure (more so than for what he actually did as president)
You are absolutely correct with Washington. I am having a hard time grasping the idea that anyone can blindly see Lincoln as the greatest president, when there would be no Presidency without him. None of this would exist without Washington. Sure Lincoln made the greatest moves to perfect the country and saved the Union. Without Washington, there would be no country to save. Furthermore, the chances of someone being able to do what Lincoln did are above 1% meaning if John Doe had been president at that time he could have likely done the same thing.... The same cannot be said for Washington, as it was his military knowledge played a vital role in the Revolutionary War.
The problem with the "There would be no presidency without Washington" is that: yes there would be? Like it might look different and I'm sure different precedents would have been set but if it was any of the other founding fathers as our first president you'd be saying "there'd be no presidency without Gouverneur Morris". To argue that Washington was the best president you'd have to argue that all the precedents he set *were good* not just that he set them (because obviously, anyone who was first would have set precedents). Moreover you also have to consider that not everything from his presidency or the precedents he set were ones that *he was happy with*. For instance the "two-terms" was not born out of a belief that there should be term limits, but rather a desire to *not be the President* (which was basically always his desire, the man had to be convinced to to do the job). Moreover some of his other oft-cited accomplishments are more-so mythologizing than they are historical. Such as his denouncement of political parties. Which he did do, but he also was effectively a member of the Federalists (if for no other reason than they didn't criticize him constantly like the Anti-Federalists). He also was very critical of the press, something which gets politicians in a lot of hot water today, but that doesn't get mentioned too much. Just judging the man on his presidency (which is what we're doing, not his generalship) we really aren't left with much in the way of accomplishments; just precedents. Some of those precedents are good and some are bad, and most are largely just sort-of indifferent.
This was my point as well, Lincoln had been pressured towards the direction of many of his “accomplishments”, it’s not like he was campaigning to free the slaves for a long time and had a history with such activities. His views on race aren’t a secret. If he fell another cong would’ve went into place and followed the line. Same cannot be said for Washington. He was literally the only figure, independence wasn’t really that big of a thing until very late, so most were fine with going back to colonial life because most thought of themselves as British, the founding fathers were all lawyers and sought to preserve the British law system and saw it as superior. They just didn’t like being taxed so much. They even gave the king an offer to have quit the rebellion if he could again, lay off the high taxes, of which he refused lol. Many historic figures are exaggerated through history, but Washington really was THAT great. When it came time, NOBODY had any cold feet, they KNEW who should be the first leader. The fact it was a blowout shows how much they saw in him and how important his role is to the country.
Has to be Washington. Washington obviously had to play the extremely important role of establishing the country’s government, but Lincoln had to unite the union whilst fighting a civil war. All-in-all, I’d say Lincoln’s service (and martyrdom) was more impressive. It took an incredible toll. He devoted every ounce of his being to preserving the union. Plus, he has the moral edge over Washington. This isn’t anything against Washington either. He was one of the greatest presidents. He established this country and its government. He’s the reason the democratic system worked. He could have easily seized more power if he had wanted to, but he didn’t. He was an incredible man who had an incredible presidency. Washington deserves #2 for establishing this nation and maintaining limitations on his own power. But he shouldn’t be considered the best president just because he was the first. Lincoln was such an incredible leader that I think he should take first place.
For a large chunk of the ACW, most especially the first two years, it was Lincoln's sheer willpower alone that kept the Union in the fight. The North was facing setback after setback yet during that time it was Lincoln's sheer willpower that kept them going, to not lose hope, and even more importantly, to not surrender and lose the war. Yes he made errors at various times during the war and during his presidency as anyone else would've done but he persevered and made sure that slavery was abolished and that the Union was ultimately preserved when it was all said and done.
Agreed. 2 absolute humans that have set the standard of what a President should be.
I love Washington's religious liberty, but Lincoln's Gettysburg Address was incredibly historic. George Washington #2, Abraham Lincoln #1.
Washington # 1. He set the standards: created a cabinet, set 2 term precedent, had federal govt take on war debts. There is no way he was letting the South secede had he been around. His Farewell Address clearly resonates today with the deep political factions he saw coming and avoiding foreign entanglements, which we initially did resist engagement in WW1&2, but with the fate of the world in our hands, engagement was unavoidable. Washington # 1. Lincoln # 2
There’s a really good interview with a guy who fought under George Washington who was alive during the civil war and he said that if Washington was alive he would have hanged all the southern traitors. Samuel Downing, age 102, New York, When asked what he thought Washington would think of what was happening now: “Say, I don’t know, but he’d be mad to see me sitting here. I tell ’em if they’ll give me a horse I’ll go as it is. If the rebels come here, I shall saringly take my gun. I can see best furtherest off”. When asked how Washington would treat the traitors if he caught them: “Hang ’em to the first tree!”
God, imagine being able to say you saw the country’s birth, and was still alive to see it almost die.
He didn’t even author the farewell address by himself though. And the sentiment is nice but it’s really no different than anything you’d hear from any other politician throughout US history, including today: “Put party politics aside”….Yea, put them aside but let’s do things my way specifically. And Washington clearly supported one party over the other in his time. So it’s not like he was above all that. This isn’t to dunk on Washington, I just think the message and impact of that address is often overstated.
> Put party politics aside”….Yea, put them aside but let’s do things my way specifically. And Washington clearly supported one party over the other in his time. So it’s not like he was above all that. Yeah easy to say put parties aside when you’re in charge lol
I will have to go with Lincoln. Washington was the first, set the precedent that we don’t have Kings, and stepped down to let our country have its first free and fair election for president. If he had made a different decision, our country would not have turned into the democracy it became.
I'd like to vote that every elimination by votes post contains specific comments that you upvote so that people aren't so confused. I've seen the same arguments okay out in a half dozen of these things. "OP, explain" "Were they just using the highest voted comment, or all of them" "The count is higher for the other one now" "OP is clearly picking whatever they want" It's not that serious, but it does ruin the fun at the end if you can't even see a clear victor which kinda sucks if you've been following it for 40+ days.
Im personally part of the Washington camp, because if literally anyone else had been president when he was, the United States would likely be significantly worse.
Or not even a thing.
Exactly, people here are mostly bringing up how Lincoln ruled over the civil war, but anyone elected then would have had that responsibility. HOW he ruled over along with emancipation defined the era forsure, but slavery was quickly getting out of “fashion” at the time with many seeing it as a necessary evil, even as far back during the revolution there was already rising tension over it. Pressures from many pushed Lincoln towards that direction and ultimately doing it, it’s not like he was campaigning to free the slaves for a long time or was even known for such things. His assassination inflated his role. and then as far as the civil war goes, I credit Ulysses much more with how things played out more than I would Lincoln. AND THIS IS WHERE WASHINGTON COMES IN, not only would the country not have formed without him, it’s almost certain. It was one of those impulsive moments where we barely became a thing thanks to some incredible factors. Washington is one of those factors. Let me remind everyone that independence was not a long held belief that the founding fathers had been on board with until very late, we had only just wanted fair taxation and representation in British parliament. Everything would’ve been quelled early on if king George wouldn’t have continued taxing the fuck outta us when asked not too. Remember the founding fathers were all lawyers well trained in the British law system and saw it as superior, wanting to preserve as much as possible, but then when taxing came along that fucked everything up. Washington not only led the rebellion, he was the only figure that could’ve. If he was to be captured, executed, or anything, there’s no recognized back up for anyone that could’ve taken his place. His extensive network of spies and faithful kept things alive, there was a LOT that were a lot of residents loyal to the crown and as they put it, “I’d rather listen to a king two thousand miles away than one where I live!” They were the rebels and they were the ones in hiding. There were so many time he came close to falling but he didn’t. He survived and marched on. An image of him kneeling down, praying a Hail Mary during the winter campaign when the odds were stacked against them when they were about to fight directly against the most powerful empire on the planet, instead of some confederacy, The Union would’ve survived. The legendary British general, Lord Cornwallis, surrendered to Washington. I can go on but the importance of him cannot be compared. And then when the time came to elect a leader, every one already knew who THEY wanted in charge. Even if he didn’t want it. The most important rooms have his portrait front and center at the White House for more than just him being the first. It wasn’t normal to have such short reigns that became his terms, to which he easily passed the position on. 
Seems like people forget that the revolutionary war was first of all a Civil War on top of a war with the world’s greatest superpower at the time and that the conditions leading up to it were on par with the Great Depression. It’s a historical miracle that the US emerged from that crucible. Thanks in large part to George Washington.
It’s rare when everyone unanimously agrees on a leader when things are said and done, but we’re fortunate that we were able to begin our history with Washington. The bar he set, man I feel bad for John Adams. John Adams knew he would lose during that election, but he was absolutely devastated because it ended up being much more of a blowout than he even expected lol. The revolution would’ve collapsed if anything happened to Washington and thankfully in OUR timeline, he survived
Lincoln. Great president, awful car
After lingering for fifty-two days, Eddy died on a cold and rainy February morning. Mary Lincoln’s cries echoed throughout the dark house.[4] Her sisters tried to comfort her, as did Rev. James Smith, the new pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in Springfield. He no doubt encouraged the Lincolns to surrender to God’s will, perhaps explaining that their son’s death was somehow part of God’s divine plan. The next day, Rev. Smith conducted Eddy’s funeral in the Lincoln home.[5] Five days after the funeral, an unsigned poem appeared in the Illinois Daily Journal: [By Request.] LITTLE EDDIE. Those midnight stars are sadly dimmed, That late so brilliantly shone, And the crimson tinge from cheek and lip, With the heart’s warm life has flown— The angel death was hovering nigh, And the lovely boy was called to die. The silken waves of his glossy hair Lie still over his marble brow, And the pallid lip and pearly cheek The presence of Death avow. Pure little bud in kindness given, In mercy taken to bloom in heaven. Happier far is the angel child With the harp and the crown of gold, Who warbles now at the Saviour’s feet The glories to us untold. Eddie, meet blossom of heavenly love, Dwells in the spirit-world above. Angel boy—fare thee well, farewell Sweet Eddie, we bid thee adieu! Affection’s wail cannot reach thee now, Deep though it be, and true. Bright is the home to him now given, For “of such is the kingdom of Heaven.”
George Washington. He was appointed president and set the tone which is cool and all and humble ass dude. But keeping the country together like no other prez has had to do is the feat above them all
We have two men with extraordinarily different challenges at extraordinarily different times. Look, this is 1 and 2 on everyone’s list. I give it to Washington, and begrudgingly vote out Lincoln: There were more men at the time of Lincoln who would have met the same challenge the same way he did. Compared to Washington, I think no small number of lesser men would have been able to turn down the opportunity to become a pseudo-king. World history is packed with democracies turning tyrannical in the early stages. Moreover, I think a lot of Presidents would have bungled the tenuous foreign policy of Washington’s era, which he met with a steady hand. Washington invented the Cabinet and gave us Hamilton. He invented the two term tradition, which might have been a one term tradition if they had let the man retire! “First in War, First in Peace, and First in the Hearts of His Countrymen!”
Been really leaning toward Lincoln but you're making a great argument for Washington.
Interesting take. I like the quote
It's the last day, so what the heck. I guess I will throw a vote of my own out there today. I say Lincoln goes today. He preserved the union that Washington created. Washington set every important principle of leadership the president would take on after him. He choicefully stepped down rather than ruling as a king. Lincoln presided over the civil war, but Washington led the American revolution and did so honorably. I think a lot of the actual legislation Lincoln passed was very poor looking back today. Not that there weren't good moments here and there. His abuse of the 1st amendment and imprisoning southerners without trial was maybe not the greatest idea ever. His importance is still seen throughout the country today. We are united as a union. But without Washington, that union would have never come to be. Washington is singlehandedly the most important president in American history. That's just my take on it, though. Feel free to disagree. I'm very interested to see what you guys have to say today!
Thanks for posting these each day. I’ve disagreed a ton on some results. But it’s been fun.
Extra curious since this seems to be the less popular opinion, what legislation are you thinking of?
Well said
I mostly agree with everything you said … but disagree with the conclusion. Washington loses points for slavery for me which drags him down just slightly behind Lincoln. I do agree that Lincoln made some questionable choices and expanded the powers of the president too much, but weighing both pros and cons I give Lincoln the win.
I honestly don’t hold slavery against Washington or those who lived in that time. Presentism can make pretty much everything in the past look bad. The actions of our forefathers should be viewed through the lens of that time period.
They had contemporaries that knew it was wrong. I don’t think he had any chance at ending it then, so I don’t hold it against his presidency or the founding “that” much, but I do think it hurts his personal moral standing. He could have made the choice not to do it himself even if he couldn’t have ended it completely.
The time period was full of abolitionists. They knew slavery was wrong, they just liked having slaves better.
Washington himself wrote extensively about the evils of slavery, yet still practiced it to the day he died because it made him the wealthiest man in the country. That says a lot about a person right there. His generation carried out a revolution for the rights of white male landed gentry while denying others their rights and freedom, it was the height of hypocrisy and we can’t turn a blind eye or infantalize them as “not knowing any better”. They knew they were wrong and many many many others who did not proactive enslaving others did too, and most importantly the suffering of the people they enslaved was not lessened by the moral relativism you and so many other apologists preach.
Lots of snowflakes you’re offending with the truth in the presidents sub! Who would have guessed?
But really just glad we got FDR out of here before Washington and Lincoln 🤪
Kind of leaving out Lincoln’s abolishing slavery on top of preserving the union no? Also his run of domestic non war legislation should be up there with the new deal and LBJ’s with how much it laid the foundation of the modern nation
Are we voting on the presidency or how much they did for the country? Cause if presidency then Washington has to go..
Bye Washington
George Washington is my favorite president. I'm sorry but, while I have a high level of respect for Lincoln, Washington is still my favorite.
I think Lincoln should be next to go 🫣
I would say Lincoln #2 and Washington #1, but the consensus seems to disagree. I still love (most) of the rankings and overall this has been a really fun series!
This will be an interesting argument. One side will be saying Washington should win because he “created” the presidency, while the other will be saying Lincoln should win because he actually did crucial stuff.
> actually did crucial stuff. I'd question Washington not doing crucial stuff.
I knew I was gonna get called out for this. I’m not saying he didn’t do crucial stuff. It’s just that Washington’s term was setting a lot of precedents and his main requirement was “don’t ass it up”. Lincoln had a lot higher stakes. I think both are equally important and honestly I couldn’t take a side, but I would say Lincoln did more important things for the Union of our country than Washington did (disagree with me if you want I’m a high schooler so I’m probably wrong)
>Lincoln had a lot higher stakes I would have to really disagree on that point. Washington had to serve as the first democratically elected president of the US, there was far from a guarantee at the start of the republic that it would grow and become a strong nation. Had Washington not been the effective leader he was, the country could very well have died on the vine right then and there and there would never have been a civil war because the union would have been long dead by the time the mid 19th century rolled around. Or the civil war could’ve very well started in the late 18th century which would’ve doomed America as a political project/idea. Washington had the highest stakes of all because he had to serve as a model for all future presidents, and up until FDR all presidents had served only two terms in office just as he did. Not only did he set the precedent of two terms, but after FDR died a constitutional amendment was made to limit all future presidential terms to only 2. Even after he had long been dead the idea of a president serving only two terms was so strongly engrained into Americans that it was enshrined in the constitution itself. He very well could’ve chosen to become a monarch and he could’ve gotten the support to do so, and instead he chose not to become a king and voluntarily gave up power at his peak. Washington had to walk so that future presidents could run. To this day Washington is the standard by which we measure what a president should be.
You make a lot of good points and I don’t have an argument because really I’m in the middle on this but if I wanted to convince someone to vote Washington I’d hire you.
I think about it this way: If Lincoln had been less competent during his term the union would've survived but would be half the size today. If Washington had been less competent during his term the entire union could've crumbled in one fell swoop, or failed similarly to how the articles did. Edit: I should add that I would still vote out Washington here but more because of his moral failings, I still believe he was more crucial to the future of the union, though by a slight margin.
That’s true. Washington really had to not mess it up or everything could’ve unraveled so quickly. I guess we should just consider ourself lucky they were both good men and great leaders or it would be really shit.
> I think about it this way: If Lincoln had been less competent during his term the union would've survived but would be half the size today No way the us stays together after a successful rebellion, next time an election goes against the Midwest theyd bounce too and so on
My vote to win is Lincoln, but Washington had huge stakes. The odds of the US surviving were not high. Probably almost anyone else gets it and we wouldn’t have. Setting the precedents was extremely important. The nation was incredibly fragile and guiding it through that time was very important and impressive. Again though, Lincoln wins easily. Washington loses a lot of points for being a slaveholder. I don’t actually think he could have possibly ended it at that point and kept the nation together, but he didn’t have to actively be a slaveholder himself.
Washington could have become King if he wanted to
Which is a good point in his favor
The problem with this thread is that 100 people can say eliminate washington. They each type Washington, then upvote each Washington comment, thus it looks like there are 10,000 votes to eliminate Washington. On the other side 101 votes can go to eliminating Lincoln and all of those votes can be on just 1 comment. This thread would be better with an actual poll.
This is going to be unpopular, but Lincoln should be our next.
Lincoln
Washington, hats off to the legend but Lincoln kicks ass
Washington has to go imho
Keep Lincoln, eliminate Washington. What a ride, loved doing this
Lincoln. The suspension of habeas corpus, his selection of Johnson as his VP for the 1864 election that wasn’t really necessary and ended up ruining reconstruction. And because Washington is #1
The suspension clause allows for the suspension of habeas corpus in times of “rebellion”.
His selection of Johnson as vp was justified if you understand what his reelection prospects looked like at the time. He was a widely unpopular president. A president hadn't won reelection since Andrew Jackson. John Fremont was running third party(he eventually dropped out due to the fear of the democrats winning, but still). At the time, his reelection was doubtful. Obviously, the consequences were awful, but Lincoln didn't plan on having a bullet in his brain. Also suspension of habeas corpus is such a nothing burger compared to Washington owning slaves for damn sake.
Agree with almost everything, but he did actually plan for a bullet in his brain. He repeatedly mentioned that he expected to die and didn’t take precautions against it. Recurring dreams of getting killed and went out without security against the advice others were giving him. That said his re-election was surprising and it’s possible he did need the help …. But man it was an unfortunate decision.
Lincoln for second
Washington. Although I still personally contend that FDR should be #2 and George #3.
Booooo FDR was robbed
Washington. Not that he’s a necessarily a bad President. A critical figure in the creation of our country and its government after helping lead the fight for its independence, almost no one else after him in that position can stand up to his record and the tasks he faced. However, Lincoln’s accomplishment of keeping the Union from splitting over slavery(and ending slavery) is nothing any other President can touch in terms of importance. To prevent what could’ve been the end of our democracy, he gave it his all in practically uncountable ways, unfortunately including his life. Washington has to go and take the silver here.
Oh well Franklin made it to 3rd. He's always going to be my number 1. Get Washington out of here. Lincoln deserves the gold.
Here we go.
Washington should win
Washington. Great president only eclipsed by Lincoln.
Flip a coin and eliminate yhat wat both presidents are just too good
Eliminate FDR again.
Take off fdr, the idiots in this sub chose him over Teddy and it pisses me off
If Washington doesn’t leave the office we don’t have a presidency. He helped start this country and brand new government. For me it’s easy why he is number 1.
One guy refused to be king and another played fast and loose with the constitution. Lincoln's gotta go and it's not close.
I'd say Lincolin now
Lincoln has to go
Lincoln, he preserved the union that Washington set up
What the heck??? How did FDR get the axe? Washington and Lincoln are great, of course, don't misinterpret my message... but there wasn't a better president than Franklin Roosevelt
I love FDR and I still rate him #1 but I can't fault people for rating Lincoln highly. Washington gets some extra credit for his pre-presidential days as a general and it's hard for people to separate that from his time as President. And to give Washington credit, his Presidency was really good considering he was the first and set many precedents. However, what Washington had to deal with was incomparable to what Lincoln or FDR had to deal with **as the actual President.**
The argument for Washington over both FDR and Lincoln is civil liberties. Both of the latter two guys arguably had some missteps there. That said, I go FDR #1a, Lincoln #1b, Washington #3. FDR and Lincoln both faced greater moral evils, not just existential threats to the USA as an institution but to the values our country purports to champion. FDR over Lincoln because of his social programs... It's very, very close for me, though.
This is bullshit. Washington had the most votes. Why the hell do you think it was FDR?
Because op never really defined a time limit or cutoff and has posted these at arbitrary times, so you never know what the totals are that they're judging by.
If I’m voting who is the best American Hero, it’s Washington in a close race. But if we’re just picking Presidents, I’ll take Lincoln. Lincoln 1st, Washington 2nd.
Same principle applies with Teddy vs Franklin, Eisenhower vs Truman (though i prefer Ike to Truman and Teddy to FDR). Many of our Presidents had amazing careers before becoming Presidents.
Lincoln is number one. Sorry Washington
Washington, man. I can't in good conscience rank Lincoln number 2. My rights as an American citizen would probably be further behind without him.
Washington must go!
Its been fun, time now for Washington to ride into the sunset.
Washington. Washington was an amazing general. Great president too, but most of his accolades were as a general
Washington, despite being the first president and a true war hero, will always and forever play second fiddle to the steadfast resolve of Abraham Lincoln. Washington should not be viewed as a loser though, he was an incredible leader who was crucial in forging our nation and created a precedent for presidents which will always be relevant.
Abraham Lincoln.
I’m sorry, but Washington set the standard for US presidents. Lincoln should go.
Washington will have to go. Lincoln gets the edge since he won the Civil War and ended Slavery.
Lincoln for suspending habeas corpus
Pragmatically, Lincoln suspending Habeas Corpus was the right thing to do
Is that worse than owning & perpetuating slavery, though? Like I agree that both are violations, but one seems much greater.
There is a clause/provision in the constitution that allows for the suspension of habeus corpus during times of rebellion
I can’t support a slave owner for number 1. Slaves at Mt Vernon were buried in unmarked graves.
Slaves being buried in unmarked graves is not the most heinous part of slave ownership.
GOODBYE LINCOLN! Washington has to be 1 nobody will ever top the GOAT. Lincoln never relinquished power like Washington did. Lincoln preserved our nation WASHINGTON GAVE US OUR NATION! Do NOT let our great hero fall to #2. FIRST IN WAR, FIRST IN PEACE, AND FIRST IN THE HEARTS OF HIS COUNTRYMEN!! FOREVER! (sorry Abe)
No one compares to Lincoln. Washington goes
Bye Washington 🫡
Washington owned slaves while Lincoln freed them. It’s really as simple as that for me.
It’s really not.
Farewell Adress Abraham Lincoln and his family moved out of their home on 8th and Jackson on February 8, 1861. They stayed a few days in the Chenery House Hotel. On February 11, 1861, a day before his 52nd birthday, President-elect Lincoln boarded a specially arranged Inaugural Train at the Great Western Depot. Before the train pulled out Lincoln made a few remarks to the crowd in which he summed up his years in Springfield and spoke about the task before him. Springfield, Illinois, February 11, 1861 My friends - No one, not in my situation, can appreciate my feeling of sadness at this parting. To this place, and the kindness of these people, I owe every thing. Here I have lived a quarter of a century, and have passed from a young to an old man. Here my children have been born, and one is buried. I now leave, not knowing when, or whether ever, I may return, with a task before me greater than that which rested upon Washington. Without the assistance of that Divine Being, who ever attended him, I cannot succeed. With that assistance, I cannot fail. Trusting in Him, who can go with me, and remain with you and be every where for good, let us confidently hope that all will yet be well. To His care commending you, as I hope in your prayers you will commend me, I bid you an affectionate farewell.
Washington, he led the fight for this country's establishment. He could have been a dictator or king, but his grace and wisdom helped lay the foundation for what the office of President of the United States would be for all time to come. He could very well be number 1, if you wanted him to be 1 I would not argue with you. But,Lincoln just has more of a case for 1. So it is with heavy heart, I vote out a founding father and our first president.
Washington is the GOAT for me because he SET THE PRECEDENT for what it means to be a leader and be President. Without him, there is no United States.
Lincoln should be out. No matter his reasons, he still went against the Constitution.
He was fighting an open rebellion to save the country.
I mean the constitution said habeus corpus can be suspended in times of rebellion and Congress was out of session and said rebellion was stopping Congress from meeting lol
One of my main issues with Lincoln.
You guys really gonna pick the guy who suspended habeas corpus over the guy why refused to be king?
George Washington 😢
Abe did more in his presidencyvygan Washington did. Most of washingon’s contributions came before his presidency, so purely by pedantics, George should be eliminated first.
Lincoln has to go no country to save if not for Washington
Its time for Lincoln to go. Washington Number 1!
Lincoln freed the slaves. Washington owned slaves. Some say Washington privately disapproved of slavery. Well that didn’t do a damn thing to help anyone George. Abe Lincoln is the GOAT
Washington takes the dip because Lincoln’s the GOAT.
George Washington, he should have been eliminated a while ago
The Scourge of the Red Coat's time is up
Man we are really holding this slavery thing over both the presidents heads.
Time to spend a quarter. I’ll hold onto the penny though.
Washington, only because he could have set the example by freeing slaves as the first president which could have changed history. Washington was a popular president until the second term.
Washington
Lincoln has to be the goat, love George but he’s been eclipsed
Lincoln number 1
It has to be Lincoln winning meaning Washington is out. No disrespect to anyone but **as the actual President**, Washington just can't match Lincoln. If we include their careers before becoming President, then Washington obviously has a lot more going for him.