THE COMMON DENOMINATOR OF PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESS

By Edwin Cooney

From generation to generation, there has been an ongoing interest in ranking past presidents in the order of their “greatness.” I have my own presidential ranking list and scholars have theirs.

What exactly causes scholars and others to rate a president as “great”, “near great”, “average”, “below average”, or “a failure” depends upon the values and mores of the generation doing the evaluating. Presidents with “Indian fighter” backgrounds such as Andrew Jackson, William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor would rate less highly today than they did back in the nineteenth century. Also, presidents such as Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower, who were regarded as “pretty average” at the close of their administrations, have risen from that average status to “near greatness” on many recent presidential surveys. Success in domestic or foreign affairs, character, oratory and the passage of “landmark legislation” under their watch are just some of the aspects taken into account in rating presidents. (Landmark legislation is legislation that marks a major societal shift in our attitude on domestic or foreign relationships.) A president’s personal popularity is increasingly a significant factor in measuring presidential greatness.

Back in 1971, I had the good fortune to personally sit with George Reedy, a former Lyndon B. Johnson press secretary, as he made the observation that until 1933 most Americans had only the vaguest impression of any president’s personality. Then Franklin Roosevelt changed all that by instituting a series of radio addresses which the news media of the day called “fireside chats”. These chats added the dimension of his warm rich voice to the average American’s impression of his strong handsome photographic image. Since FDR’s time, Americans have been able -- first through radio and newsreels, then through the image of television and finally through televised press conferences and coverage of other presidential activities -- to get an increasingly clearer image of every American president’s personality.

No president is completely popular or unpopular with everyone. Hence, every president strives for a consensus of favorable opinion with regard to his personality and ideas in order to get his agenda through Congress with the backing of the American people.

One of the most qualified men ever to become president was John Quincy Adams. He had been a Diplomat, a U.S. Senator, and Secretary of State. He was also the son of our second president. However, because his election to the presidency in 1825 over the popular General Andrew Jackson was questionable and because he was seen as personally cold, combative and unyielding, he was unable to get anything through Congress — except, finally, support for the establishment of the Smithsonian Institution. JQA had lots and lots of ideas, some of them pretty good ones, but he lacked sufficient public or Congressional support for his person or his agenda. Thus, he lost his 1828 bid for re-election to General Jackson—the overwhelmingly popular hero of the War of 1812.

Dwight Eisenhower’s presidency could have been a disaster. He lacked domestic political experience and faced a rather hostile isolationist conservative GOP Congressional majority during his first two years as well as a solid Democratic majority in Congress during the rest of his presidency. However, people simply liked Ike. He left office with significant accomplishments to his credit and was nearly as popular when he left as he was upon becoming President. More to the point, his ranking — even among scholars —has increased over the years.

While not every likable president is ranked among the top ten “great and near great presidents” (for instance, James Monroe, William McKinley, John Kennedy, and Gerald Ford) and while not every one of the top ten greatest presidents was likable much of the time (LBJ, Woodrow Wilson, and James K. Polk, for example), they did manage to connect with the people’s greatest passions and needs at critical times. They were forceful enough to carry their agendas and also to be ranked highly by scholars and the public alike.

Political and historical perspective, knowledge, intelligence, and a capacity for administrative detail and analysis are invaluable tools for presidential success. However, they seldom work unless people really like the president who possesses them. Hence, the common denominator of presidential success, especially today, is likeability.

Since the beginning of this year, Americans have been examining the political and personal credentials of twelve men and one woman who have offered to serve as our next president. So far, it appears that likeability is carrying the day. No surprise, comparatively, it almost always does.

Intangible as it is, presidential likeability is by its very nature inclusive. It compels constructive consensus building.

That’s why such names as Lincoln, Roosevelt, Washington, Truman, Eisenhower and Reagan linger as heroic names long after the sun has set on their day.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

EDWIN COONEY