bedsitter23

Worst. President. Ever.: James Buchanan, the POTUS Rating Game, and the Legacy of the Least of the Lesser Presidents by Robert Strauss

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

With its title, cover and premise, I couldn't not pick up this book. Strauss suggests that there are plenty of books written about the guys on Rushmore, but not one writes about the least great Presidents. He also suggest we can learn from that.

Indeed, he says there have only four attempts at a Buchanan biography, and the most recent was part of a complete Presidential set, so he had to be written about.

As much as the book talks about Buchanan, it also discusses how we rate Presidents, and who is truly worst- with nods to Harding, Pierce, Hoover, Nixon, Carter, Dubya and all the others.

Buchanan does have a pretty solid resume in this regard. He had a career of being indecisive- but when he made decisions as President he seemed to make the wrong ones. This included possibly influencing the Dred Scott Decision, making the financial Panic of 1857 even worse, being ineffectual against John Brown and in "Bleeding Kansas" and starting pointless international incidents with Paraguay (!) and Canada (I had completely forgot about the Pig War, which was an I Can Read book by Betty Baker which was available in my grade school.)as well as against the Mormons in Utah.

There is a bit of a nod to 2016 with Buchanan being one of the most President-ready candidates. He had been Secretary of State, a Congressman, an ambassador to Russia and Britain. He had been a surefire candidate for at least three election cycles, though his bumblings made it that he did not get to run as the young firebrand, but instead as a much elder statesman.

Strauss makes an interesting point about the string of Presidents from Jackson to Lincoln, which contains some of our lowest points. Yet, also an era that gave us some of our greatest minds or at least were leaders of men- Henry Clay, John C Calhoun, Daniel Webster, William Seward, Thomas Hart Benson, Stephen Douglas, Jefferson Davis.

It's an interesting point that he makes that people like Clay didn't win (though Clay, Calhoun and Webster all ran), likely because they took bold stands, and spent their careers making bold stands in Congress.

Whereas the country nominated and elected those that might be considered moderate. Buchanan was obsessed with the Presidency from the start. He often took no stand or both stands on an issue. He grew up in a heavy Federalist district and became a Democrat when the Federalists folded.

Andrew Jackson hated his ambition and sent him to Russia, where Buchanan had a major deal signed with the Czar. As a cabinet member and ambassador, he did not have his stances tied to votes, and won the nomination by being a bit of a waffler.

Buchanan's main reason for success was he could throw great parties. The book does talk about the rumor Buchanan was gay, but the author does not seem to find much evidence there.

The main case against Buchanan was that he did not believe the country should stop succession, or any case did little to stop it. Also, the country was probably going down a path where conflict might be inevitable, but Buchanan instead of taking marked steps like the Compromise of 1850, seemed to think the whole slavery issue would go away. Franklin Pierce was guilty of many of the same things Buchanan was, but he was in favor of keeping the union above all else.

This book was right down my alley. It did get repetitive, and at times was a bit clunky. The book tries to do two things- rank the worst Presidents (or advise against doing that), and Strauss also really wants to write a respectable Buchanan biography. He tries to make it a fun read as evidenced by the title, but he has done his research on Buchanan and wants to make sure he is presenting that as well.

It's hard not to agree with the conclusion. Buchanan was one of the most qualified candidates for the job, but he also was fed by ambition and took stands for personal gain instead of principle. There were some bad Presidents, but his refusal to do much of anything about succession, puts him on top.

View all my reviews