CNN

Not at all low enough. He should be ranked the 3rd worst president minimum.

Bogus. Lincoln was the all time worst president... Bush a close second.

I Personally think Geo Bush is #1 worst president. And His dad was
#2 worst. They were both bad presidents.
Pres William Jefferson Clinton was much better than he is getting credit!

Historians? Any historian worth anything would wait to make a judgment like this. To say Jimmy Carter is twenty fifth shows these fools don't know what they speak about.

As for Dutch in the Hamptons, partisan poison darkens clear mine to judge.

Well chris take a bath in some piss this was the worst president ever. What if you were left without clean running water and no home. You need to reevaluate this president. That goes for Joe in Austin also!

No surprise that W ranks among the worst presidents in U.S. history.

Injected politics and ideology into every government agency; launched a war under misleading pretenses and then bungled its aftermath; consistently favored big business at the expense of the consumer and environment; presided over a huge financial meltdown; polarized the nation to unprecendented levels; ran up record deficits; showed a total lack of leadership in the federal government's response to Katrina, relied on fear to manipulate congress and the American people to support his domestic and foreign policy actions; severely diminshed America's moral and political standing in the world, and showed total disdain for the American constitution to which he was sworn to protect.

Ranked as the seventh worst president? History's verdict will no doubt be even harsher.

That is because they are voting with emotion. You can't really be objective until he has been out of office for years and years, far detached from current events. Plus, when looking at the last time they did this "survey," they all ranked differently.

How do they know how he will be judged decades from now. This is just another cheap shot against a Republican President.

I am sure they think Obama will be a right up there with Lincoln after only 3 weeks!

Ronald Reagan 10th??? You should read the book "Tear DownThis Myth....How the Reagan Legacy Has Distorted Our Politics and Haunts Our Future" by Will Bunch!!! He stunk! And W. should be on the Top Ten List of Worst Criminal Presidents!!

It seems to me that anytime there is a thing that is discussed the conservatives are always crying about socialist and liberals. If everybody is against conservatives why don't they leave the country and form a new nation. They have the constitutional right to do so.

I think the historians are being VERY generous indeed.

36th worst out of 43. Are you kidding me? That's to kind for for him.

Hahaha serves him right.

If "W" is the 7th worst, I'd love to know the story of the 6 below him. To be worse than George W is some feat. Historically, I just judge by where he started in 2000 and how he left the Whitehouse in 2008. It pretty much speaks for itself. He was actually so bad and left such a mess, I don't want Obama to blame him if he can't get any results going forward...

Although a monumental task lies ahead.

Leave it to academia to judge Bush within a 4 week period. Facts about his administration unknown to the public will take years to surface. The economic aspect relates directly to Mr Clinton and Mr Carter's terms. Me personally, I'll wait another 10 to 20 years after the facts are available. as history has showed. Do you honestly think we are privy to all information inspite of what the media wants us to believe?

I'm sure across the world you'll have a hard time finding someone who would like to see Bush still in the Whitehouse, but it's way too early to judge on a scale like that. We're gunna have to wait at least a couple decades – let the next generation be the judge. Everyone alive during the Bush admin will have a subjective opinion.

WOW! He lucked out~~~they should have asked ME.

how in the world would Bill Clinton go down as a better President than Reagan. Come on...

Yes its way too early for this kind of survey.

Chris February 16th, 2009 11:16 am ET

This is a waste of time. You cannot judge a president until after he has been out of office for at least 8 years. These historians are nothing more than socialist liberals

Oh yeah because socialists really love Ronald Reagan (who is at #10). Give me a break, chump.

I think they are right. I don't hate President Bush. I respect somebody that can stand up for their beliefs and fight for them. But yet he has been one of the worst Presidents in the history of this country. It is entirely his fault, with regard to the economy. President Obama has already stood up and said, "I screwed up" with regard to the Daschle appointment. That takes integrity to admit that you were wrong. George Bush never apologized for anything or admitted that he was wrong for anything. History will not be kind to him.

It's difficult to imagine any president worse than Bush; maybe he just seems worse because we had to live through his presidency. Depressing.

jimmy carter at 25th?! he was the most disappointing president!

Buchanan did not try to destroy the Constitution or end the rule of law. Bush went out of his way to do both. Bush is the worst president this country has ever had, and proof that you should never elect an amoral moron to any office. Especially not the Presidency.

The 7th worst? Really?

I'd have thought he'd have made the top 3 at least.

Not only will time cause W's ranking to slide even farther, it will cause Clinton's to rise. I seem to remember Reagan's ranking was much higher 10 years ago. Talk about "trickle-down."

While I agree that Bush should be given years before his legacy is determined (ask Truman), I can guarantee that he wasn't worse then Carter.

They're being too kind. He belongs at the very bottom.

Well, the good news is he doesn't have far to fall and I doubt he'll ever beat out Buchanan – the one thing you CAN say about W is that he the South didn't secede during his miserable 8 years. How about Cheney, though? Do they rate evil Vice Presidents? If they do, he's a shoo-in for worst ever.

Why would anyone protect Bush? His administration was a debacle. He was clearly not intellectually or morally up to the task. He is a dry drunk people.

Why is Ronald Reagan SO OVERRATED?

His administration had the most corruption charges of high government officials than any other administration in HISTORY (138 in total). Iran-Contra anyone?

Reaganomics didn't get us out of the recession, the Fed lowered interest rates. That got the economy moving again until his failed policies got us into another recession. He tripled the national debt! And he's a "conservative"?

He did NOT end the Cold War by expanding the military. It wasn't his doing.

He de-unionized the country, expanded the gap b/w the rich and poor, and sold out America to corporate industries. He's the reason we have so many problem today with less than 1% control the country.

And yet he's considered a top 10 president? He was an actor playing president. He wasn't good. But overrated by the pro-Reagan media.

How is Ronald Reagan 10th and Jimmy Carter 25th?

I was intrigued by this list until I say Jimmy Carter at #25... There is no way that George Bush was worse that Carter, come on...

Yeah right. Wait 10 to 20 years. After that wait another 20 years, or let say 100 years. Historians are socialist liberals. Do you people have any idea who used this type of language? Take a guess..Yeah right, commies and their close friends and foes fascists. You are either with us or against us. It does sound like democracy. You people should be shipped to either Cuba or North Korea. Good luck morons.....

I love how people are whining about Bush being 36th, he really should be 44th for how bad he was. There is no need to wait because the effects of his presidency are already felt and he didn't turn the tide on anything before he left office and set no foundation for the future.

His standing MAY change; however what they said about Nixon when I was a little kid still stands unchanged = great foreign policy vision RE China & USSR, but a vicitm of his own paranoia. What CAN be said about GW is the stunning sloppiness of decision making & chronic lack of " doing homework" bordered on incompetence. Which aint good.

I think the perspective of a few more years will put Mr. Bush at the very bottom of the list. His arrogance and incompetence have set our nation and our planet back more than eight years' worth. He has been a very negative factor on many, many fronts.

Based on the data available to the historians I'm surprised Bush isn't rated lower. Time will tell if he will move up or down in the ratings.

The past pres should have been on a list all his own.
What with torture/running the country in the ground/financial mess/not to mention the "criminal rulings" that should be coming his way.
Being listed as 7 was way to kind.

The only list Bill Clinton belongs on is a prison roll call list. Bill Clinton as history will prove is just above Jimmy Carter, as the two worst presidents in American History. Historians that answered that question now about George Bush are evidently at the bottom of there respective career.

To all that seems to think and have their opinions of our former President Bush. His way of doing things may not have been to the likens of the american people, however he certainly saw to it that our country was being protected from any further terrorist attacks and President Bush gets a big applaud from our household. He did the best he could considering his congress and senate seats that stood very much in his way of final decisions. Another thing," DO NOT FORGET President Bush and this country inherited quite a few problems that trickled down to his administration from former Presidents. Go back and study your History Americans.

Liberals hate Bush. Dog bites man. Stop the presses.

Oh Chris, you act like being a socialist liberal is a bad thing. I'd much rather be socially liberal at this point. The alternative is being a conservative, a much worse thing if you ask me.

oh yea, Jimmy Carter is better than W...

Obama will make W look like Thomas Jefferson..................

There are some considerations that have not been addressed. First, who are these historians? What are their political views? Who did they study under or what influenced their learning? What are their eras of interest [I'm assuming all are American Historians]?

It is interesting to note that since the 2000 rankings, the order has changed almost completely [Lincoln still number 1, I think Washington was better]. Clinton jumped like 5 spots... so it's obvious that time is a factor. And that most people, Dutch/Hampton Roads, VA as a prime example, are very near sighted in regards to history.

But on my personal opinion... Washington is number 1 with Lincoln being a close second. I think Bush senior was a top ten, if he'd been re-elected top 5. FDR is overrated and Andrew Johnson is very underrated, because he was extremely misunderstood. Like Johnson, Bush has a very misunderstood presidency, at least at this point. Time will tell.

These historians are scholars. What's your degree in, fairytales? GW Bush should be labeled the worst in history. He did nothing to prevent this disaster.

This boob got us into a non-winable war, stripped of of our rights, spied on us as a nation and he is only 7TH??? Get real everyone knew he was the worst after his first day in office.

I think most or all of us will be dead and gone before Bush's place in history is set. Remember Lincoln was also criticized and hated by many people of his day (and not just southerners) for an unpopular war that killed many Americans (sound familiar?).

I don't think anyone can predict the outcome of a president's historical significance until he or she has actually become history and is not still last week's news.

Wait until Europe and the rest of the World tries him on war crimes. Then he'll become the worst.

IN the case of Bush, I think it's fair to judge his as one of the worst Presidents to ever take office. He was horrible! Wake up people! His only concern was making is Oil thug friends rich and seeking revenge on Iraq. What a joke he was. Same goes for Cheney as well

Waith 10-20 years.. PLease!

So he doubles he deficit and establishes torture as the rule for behavior of the United States, do you really need eight to twenty years to know that he was not up to the standards of American presidents? It is people like you who are responsible for his bad behavior and bad record.

Are you kidding me? How in the world could bush not easily be in the top 3 worst presidents ever? 7th, historians are being way too nice. OOPS, did I say that out loud? I must be another one of those bunny killing, baby tossing, welfare loving liberals out to doom the country!! Please Republicans, most of your own party is done slipping on your tears.

Ahh....just more liberalism at its best. Tired of yellow-dog journalism. CNN, try something new. Try reporting the news without a spin.

This is funny and i'm actually not surprised he rated that low, but I do believe it may be to early to judge. I definately wouldn't say that the historians are socialist liberals because I would think that there is some sort of metrix that they go on, i mean it's not just heresay.

Does it matter? Must everything be an E Best Of list or a VH! Topp 100 list? It only shows that Bush managed to do what he set out to do: Dumb down America,

Chris, do you know the difference between a socialist and a liberal? Obviously not. Stop calling names and get an education.

On a list of Presidents ranked by I.Q., George W. Bush would be at the bottom.

Actually, George W. Bush should not even be on any list of Presidents because, he is a War Criminal, responsible for the death of 4000 US Troops.

Move over Mr. Buchanan, here comes BHO!!!!!

Poor Mr. Bush...catching it from all directions...

Dutch,

Are you kidding? You think Clinton was better than Reagan...you must be drinking the cool-aid. Reagan led the US to the best economic period ever...which came right after President 25 (who should be 43), Carter, who led us to 13% interest rates and over 18% unemployment. That's the liberal policy. Clinton is just as culpable as Bush for this economic crisis. He began the policies that Bush couldn't get rid of, such as mandatory minority lending. C'mon, nobody saw that making banks loan money to a certain faction of people regardless of credit risk was going to be a problem.

Think about things before you say them.

I wonder if these hisotians are from the same progressive schools whose economic professors are now saying that deficit spending is good for America..

LOL. Whether it's now or 20 years from now, Bush will certainly be a candidate for the worst president in US history. As events of the past unfold in the next several years even Bush's biggest supporters will be hard pressed to defend his record. This man should be in prison along with Cheney and Rove.

Republicans are a joke, there now saying you have to wait 10 to 20 years to judge a former president. Even a Idiot knew Bush was the worst president in our history, why would anyone have to wait 10 years to say what's all ready known?

When policies go into effect they don't start impacting the country right away. It takes years to see the results. Clinton had a great presidency because of things that Reagan did. Bush had a bad presidency because of things that Clinton did.

If Iraq and Afghanistan become democratic societies and peace and democracy spreads throughout the middle east Bush could be considered one of the greatest presidents of all time. I believe that Bush knows this and he did what he thought would be best for the world and not just America. What happens in the rest of the world does affect America.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha......

Better than I thought it would be for him. I thought he would be at the very bottom. Oh that's right we were safe so that should give him a better place in history isn't that what Republicans say right? Well he was in office for a year and the worst attack on American soil ever happened. People seem to forget that he was in office for a while when Sep 11 happened so all you Bushies go pound sand when you say he kept us safe He is between the Iraq war and 9-11 responsible for about 10000 Americans lives and God only knows how many Iraqi civilian's as well. ............7th shoot how about #1 worst ever!!!!!!

Socialist Liberals, lol! Wow and they named Regan as 10th good lord Chris, please clean out your head for a few seconds. Sorry to say but I am a republican and I too believe W will not recieve high marks. He did not stay true to his party values. Anyone who calls out the teacher because they made an F on the test is usually the real problem. I recall many of those types in my school days. The fact of the matter is, Bush 2 was not a great President, you don't need 1, 2, 20 or 100 years to understand this. I lived through him myself like others before him and I am 55 years old.

The fact that Jimmy Carter was not dead last tells you that this is just a political hack job.

Hit the nail on the head, although Bush should be lower and Clinton should be higher. Why wait 10 to 20 years for what all Americans know is true or have you not been paying for those last 8 years

I saw this coming!

WORST PRESIDENT EVER.

We are now seeing the effects of Clinton's administration and foreign policies and he's #15? What a joke... Definitely way to early to tell.

60 historians put Abraham Linclon at the top for freeing 4 million from the tryanny of a oppression government.

Yet the same 60 put Bush near the bottom..., the man that accomplished 14 times more than Lincoln??

I agree with Joe in Austin. Lets wait 20 years to judge "W". By then he will be the very bottom of the list. Putting him at 36 is way to high.

Give it time. Reagan and GWB will rank lower as history judges them better.

Yesterday or 20 years from now, rotten fish is still going to be rotten. Economically, diplomatically and militarily, Bush's performance as president was bad. That's the reality of it, and it's not going to change.

Just wait until Obama's term is over and Bush will look real good.

Apparently, the media needs to keep printing stories about Bush to distract us from the mess his successor is making.

None of them was perfect, even Lincoln and washington had their share of bad decisions and moments, but isn't it a bit too early? I mean, GWB was a disgrace (no doubts about it) but he's been out of office for less than a month!
It's very unlikely he'll have a comeback like Truman had (even if we wait for... say... 50 years!), but still, it's too early.

Its not too early to judge G.War.Bush he is the worst president in the american history.Without any survey or poll one can tell he is the BS president MF president of american history

I agree with the historians Ha-Ha... THAT'S FUNNY.

Yesterday or 20 years from now, rotten fish is still going to be rotten. Economically, diplomatically, militarily and constitutionally, Bush's performance as president was bad. That's the reality of it, and it's not going to change.

That's right all you conservative boneheads... presidential historians are all morons and "socialist" liberals because they actually KNOW SOMETHING. Typical republican defense. The crusade against intelligence goes on, as it was championed by this clown for eight years.

I could not believe that a media could be more bias than CNN.
Maybe you could have another report or survey claiming that obama is the greatest one in US history next week.
I am very disspointted by u, CNN

WHERE IS THE "SURPRISE!!" FACTOR IN THIS MOST OBVIOUS OF STATEMENTS?????

When more bad news rolls in and after the next terrorist strike, people will long for the relative security of the Bush years. Give him credit where it is due and stop blaming Bush for the corrupt morals of society at large.

Wait a second...I'm about to channel my inner conservative....OK. I'm ready....

THOSE HISTORIANS ARE A BUNCH OF MAIN-STREAM MEDIA LIBERALS! HOW DARE THEY?!? REAGAN AND DUBYA SHOULD BE TIED FOR #1!!! JIMMY CARTER SHOULD BE LAST! IT'S ALL GOTCHA POLITICS! DEMOCRATS ARE ALL SOCIALISTS AND NONE OF THEM WANT TO WORK!!!

There, how's that? Whew, that tired me out.

That is much much to high for Reagan and Bush Jr. I guess if you ruin an economy it gets you points with historians these days. Both of these men did their best to get us where we are today and we (the American people) suffer for their incompetence.

definitely should wait a good 8-10 years or so.... THEN put Bush on the bottom of the list where he belongs.

I agree that judgement should wait a bit longer. I am sure he will then claim his rightful place as the worst

I am surprised at the short sightedness of these historians. I figured, that of all people, historians were the ones who understood that the legacy of a President takes years to develop. Truman is a perfect example. There is no way what so ever to accurately rate President Bush's legacy right now. A President's legacy is not determined by emotion. It is determined by facts, and the fact is, we don't have all of the facts on the Bush years. We have feelings. We have media reports feeding those feelings, but we don't have all of the facts. And we don't yet know the final outcome of many of his policies. Maybe these historians just want some attention. I don't know, but I just wonder if there are any objective minds left in this Nation.

your "surveys" are propaganda and bunk, pure and simple. this one is like your previous survey of "3,000" respondents which was trumpeted by you as showing that most of of the country was eager for president bush to leave office. who were the "historians" whom you surveyed this time? probably a bunch of left liberals.

Abraham Lincoln the best? That's probably because we now live in the Federal States of America, rather than the United States of America like what George Washington and Thomas Jefferson tried to achieve.

I wish he could have served a 3rd term in office.

Chris, I feel sorry for you. It must be depressing to go through life constantly paranoid and thinking the worst about people. Not everyone is a socialist liberal out to re-write history.

Bad presidents don't get elected to two terms! He's just being blamed for the economy...wait a minute who controlled congress???

I would love to know why CNN is posting such a sided story from a source like "C-SPAN"....I would love to see the so called "historians" who are already determining a president's legacy one month after being out of office. REal historians actually wait to make such determinations.

IN MY MIND ,AS CLEARLY AS POSSIBLE GEORGE W BUSH WAS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY. HE WAS A DICTATOR WITH HIS BUDDY DICK CHENEY .

I disagree with their ranking of Bush...I think he should be rated the absolute worst President in U.S. history.

yes, wait 10 to 20 years to get a more objective assessment. there's no way there were 6 people that were worse than bush.

I wonder if the 60 historians fall into the same category as 90% of all "journalists"?? (Democrat)

Come 2012 when we had four years of Obama and his Nationalist-Socialist programs and do nothing Change... he would be making Bush look pretty good.

CNN is on a mission to white-wash the obstructionist Republicans and make them out to be the heroes of America for their ignoble attempt to block the Stimulus bill. Good job, CNN! You only report Republican Talking Points. It's funny that the righties call you Communist News Network because the truth is it's more like Conservative News Network. You are FAR from fair and balanced. Do a study on yourselves and count how many Democrats you have come on your shows vs. how many Republicans. We have a Democratic House, Senate, and Executive and STILL you give WAY more voice to the Republicans! What are you so afraid of???

Borrow & Spend ... The New Name For the Republicans ...

In each year that he was President ….

Democrat Jimmy Carter increased the national debt by $80B

Republican Ronald Reagan increased the national debt by $200B

Republican George H. W. Bush (41) increased the national debt by $400B

Democrat Bill Clinton increased the national debt by $185B

Republican George W Bush (43) increased the national debt by $640B

So they next time the Republicans use the “Tax & Spend Liberal” gimmick against Democrats, remember these HARD facts.

Republicans are responsible for the clear majority … over 80% of the balance on our national credit card …..

So who are the Borrow & Spenders and who tends to clean up their mess?? That would be the Democrats...

Now Bush has saddled Obama with an economy that needs to have CPR and electric shock applied to bring it back to life. This requires additional spending to counteract the money Bush wasted during his presidency.

Wait 10, no 20 years, and Bush will have surpassed Buchanan as the worst President. Good suggestion, Joe in Austin!

Bushs' presidency can be described as the "Dismantling of the United States Constitution." History will get the verdict correct. He was the worst president. I can't think of any other president in history who sent American soldiers to war under false pretenses.

Historians are unemployed liberals with notihng better to do than criticize great american patriots . President Bush did all right - History will show he kept us all safe after 9-11 - gave us an all important foothold in the mid east – took care of terrorists - and for the better part of his 2 terms, this country was robust in growth and prosperity

To the naysayer historians and liberals -- go collect your welfare chack and be quiet

All Bush cared about was getting rid of Saddam, nothing else. He abused his power to exact a personal revenge. He did not think in the best interest of the country. When he kept saying the troops will remain in Iraq so long as I am president, I lost all respect for him.

These "historians" were far too generous with Bush by not putting him at the verty bottom of the heap.
If they wait a while, they will find out the crimes that his administration has commiteed in those awful 8 years.

When a Presidency ends it takes 20-30 years before documents are declassified and released to the public. This means that these alleged historians are making judgments based on polling data that we all knew was low before he left office.

In the end, history may not be kind to former President Bush but it should be noted that he did the best he could under circumstances that would try anyone in the office.

Dubya needs to just go into hiding and not try to say or do anything for about 20 years. That will give the repub history revisionists enough time to do what they do best. By that time, no one, including me, will care.

Oh wait though...bush got reelected didn't he? Obama's not really on the road to do that at the the rate that he's headed...love how the media just keeps bashing bush though...nah...they're not living in the past

GEORGE W BUSH JR THE WORST PRESIDENT IN US HISTORY SO FAR!

Bush-lied
Bush-Murderer
Bush-Nearly Destroyed our country! WORST PRESIDENT EVER! Well atleast I can say Proudily I never voted for the Moron! not The first time or the Second!

He came in 36th? Surely you jest. He should either be last (43rd) or not even be mentioned in future history books.

They actually gave him FAR better than he deserves. The one category they use" pursue equal justice" gies modern presidents a very unfair advantage. bush belongs in a sparring match with buchannan for last place, and if you remove that one category he is.

Way too soon. Tainted by the left-wing hatred that has yet to dissipate. And Dutch in Hampton Roads.... YES Reagan before Clinton. Thats a no-brainer. Reagan LED the nation through his eight years. Clinton followed whatever way the wind was blowing the polls.

Bad President? Ya think?????

Give him time.. he will move up to the all time worst.

Why should this low result be shocking? George W. Bush started an illegal war of aggression against a country who had not posed a national security threat to our country using false pretenses, in violation of the UN Charter and the very US Constitution. This war has misplaced 4 million out of 25 million Iraqis – that would be the equivalent of 48 million displaced Americans. This war has led to hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths, the rise of Islamic extremism in a previously secular Arab state, the emergence of Iran as the regional power (Saddam Hussein's Baath regime was a buffer against Iran), not to mention more than 4 thousand dead US servicepersons and dozens of thousands of injured US troops.

Bush is a traitor, a terrorist, a mass murderer, and a war criminal.

How did he score so good? Must have been a 60 member panel of hard core Republicans. Only way I can imagine him scoring so well on this

Of course this news agency would find a poll that pounds Bush. Anything to get the Obamamania going again. Nicely done, CNN.

Next headline...implement the 'Fairness Doctrine' and bring political fairness to media. Then, CNN can change their format to glorifying BO and THEY can change their name to Bush Bashing Channel...no, wait, BBC is alreay taken.

Thank you for your responsiblity, CNN.

Give it time......ol' Dubya will achieve that glorious status as nation's worst once all the secrets come out about manipulating the Constitution, illegal wiretapping, torture, raping the environment, and everything else we haven't heard about yet. I can't believe Reagan ranked ahead of Clinton or that Bush Sr ranked so high.

No serious historian of any merit would make such an assessment this soon after GWB's presidency. This reporting of such a ranking can be immediately discredited on that basis alone.

This is a joke.... anyone with a serious knowledge of history knows that it takes much longer than a month to see how a president's policies pan out.

An impeached president at 15th? Carter at 25th? Must've been a lot of liberal historians contacted for this survey.

Ronald Reagan before Bill Clinton? These historians aren't too bright. George W. Bush should be at the very botton.

This is a waste of time. You cannot judge a president until after he has been out of office for at least 8 years. These historians are nothing more than socialist liberals.

It's BS. It's too early. Wait 10, no 20, years.