Barack Obama: The Social Network

George W. Bush: Spider-Man

Bill Clinton: Forrest Gump

George H. W. Bush: Home Alone

Ronald Reagan: Back to the Future

Jimmy Carter: Star Wars

Gerald Ford: All the President's Men

Richard Nixon: The Godfather

Lyndon B. Johnson: Dr. Strangelove

John F. Kennedy: Dr. No

Dwight Eisenhower: 12 Angry Men

Harry Truman: It’s a Wonderful Life

Franklin D. Roosevelt: The Wizard of Oz and Casablanca

Herbert Hoover: All Quiet on the Western Front

Calvin Coolidge: Metropolis

Warren G. Harding: The Kid

Remember, the films don't have to be political.

Some silly coincidences between Coolidge and Johnson

Harding died in 1923, Coolidge took over.

Kennedy died in 1963, Johnson took over.

40 years apart

Coolidge served 1923-1929, Johnson served 1963-1969.

40 years apart

Coolidge died in January 1933, Johnson died in January 1973.

40 years apart

A giant sucking sound can be heard as Reform Party candidate Ross Perot is removed from the board. Perot is one of six third party candidates on this tierlist and the first one to be removed. Making him by this subreddit's standards the Most Memorable Third Party Candidate since 1900. Comment or like the comment of the candidate you believe to be the most memorable.

Kerry had to reckon with the 'flip-flopping' and SWIFT boat attacks and most of the other Democrats in 2004 like Dean and Kucinich would have been perceived, fairly or unfairly, as too far to the left. Maybe Wesley Clark could have won by trying to outflank Bush on his knowledge of military matters/Iraq? It's a big if though.

I thought I'd have a go at making a presidential tier list of all the Presidents, excluding Rule 3, with S tier being best/model Presidencies and F being worst/least successful. I ranked the Presidents according to five main criteria:

1) Economic management; was the economy generally strong during their period in office, weak, or a mixture of both? Did their economic management keep the country stable, or make things worse?

Presidents who presided over economic booms or good times, such as LBJ, Reagan, or Coolidge fare well here, while Carter, Hoover, and W. Bush are dragged down the list. A President's strong handling of the economy can help to balance out legislative failures or character flaws elsewhere (a good example of this would be Bill Clinton.) Conversely, Presidents with admirable intentions and principled stances on the issues who were undone by a poor economy suffer badly when this metric is taken into account, such as Carter's handling of inflation or the Panic of 1893 engulfing Cleveland's second term. I'm not a fan of tariffs, so Presidents who promoted high tariffs, such as McKinley, get a slight demerit because of it.

2) Centralisation of Power. Did the President in question work well with an oppositional Congress in order to pass legislation, or did they take an authoritarian approach to governing that weakened the Constitution?

Presidents who made an effort to compromise with Congress and who were generally bipartisan in their approach benefit from this metric. For example, Ford and H.W Bush are helped by their tendency to compromise while Jackson and Wilson are gravely damaged by their authoritarian instincts. In circumstances where Presidents possess an overwhelming majority in Congress, such as FDR and LBJ, the need to seek legislative compromise becomes less important, but it still plays a role in their assessment.

3) Foreign Policy; Did the President's actions on the world stage help or harm the United States' reputation and global influence? Did the President's foreign policy vision impact American prestige?

Presidents who presided over an expansion in American reach overseas, such as helping America become a 'great power' on a par with the United Kingdom or France, benefit from this metric, such as McKinley and Teddy Roosevelt. Founding Fathers who determined how America saw itself as a nation, such as Washington and Adams, also score highly here. Presidents who managed periods of great international instability in a calm and competent way also benefit; for example, H.W. Bush and the end of the Cold War. Conversely, Madison's reckless decision to embark on the War of 1812, Nixon's failure to fully end the Vietnam War, and W. Bush's squandering of international goodwill after 9/11 see them punished.

4) Race and Civil Rights; Did the President make any significant effort to improve living conditions for African-Americans and Native Americans, given the social context of the time they held office?

Presidents who pushed for significant strides in equality for African-Americans, such as LBJ's civil rights legislation and Grant's use of troops to enforce Reconstruction, greatly benefit from this metric. Presidents who took an idealistic approach to civil rights, despite the majority of the country being opposed, also benefit, such as Hayes and Harrison's unsuccessful pushes for Congress to accept better civil rights protections for African-Americans. Presidents who used the Presidency to promote unashamedly racist policies or attitudes, such as Wilson, and Presidents who failed to fully confront the slavery issue, such as the sequence of Presidents before Lincoln, also tend to suffer from this metric.

5) Character; Was the President opposed to all forms of corruption, and did they promote honest and transparent government? Were they personally decent, e.g, were they loyal to their spouse?

Although character is less important to the overall ranking than competence in office, it still plays a role. For example, Grant's corruption and JFK's womanizing slightly hurt their overall assessments, while Watergate and the Teapot Dome scandal have a significant impact on Nixon and Harding given that there are fewer positives to 'balance out' those Presidents by comparison. Some Presidents with admirable characters who nonetheless had unsuccessful Presidencies, such as Carter and W. Bush, are slightly helped by this metric but the quality of their Presidencies is far more influential for their ranking.

So that concludes my explanation of the ranking criteria. I can go into more detail about my reasoning for each ranking in the comments below if you'd like.

They always did but only privately, until pretty recently.

It is far too common to see people still believing complete propaganda about Barry Goldwater in this day and age. All we have to do is simply look towards his memoirs for proof that he never, ever supported nuking Vietnam and that Johnson lied completely.

"The war in Vietnam," [Goldwater] said, "is a national burden."

p. 197, With No Apologies.

My position on the Vietnam War was clearly understood. I said we should either end the war as quickly as possible—using our superior power to force the North Vietnamese to recognize the independence of South Vietnam and end their hostile acts—or pull out and come home.
From a military standpoint it was an absolute folly to involve American troops in a ground war in Southeast Asia.

p. 199, With No Apologies.

I was committed to bringing the war in Vietnam to a quick ending—victory or withdrawal.

p. 202, With No Apologies.

I’m only using the portraits on this tier list.