Historians have not looked too kindly on the presidents of the 1920s, usually judging them as mediocre. Do you agree with this evaluation of their performance? Explain using specific, factual examples from your readings and notes.
Post is due by 9:00pm Sunday, March 15.
Yes I agree with them because of many reasons. One is that Harding was not an ethical man, because he was trying to woo or attract married women. This seems very "unpresident" like. The president is supposed to be the equivalent to an ideal man and a vision of what America is supposed to be. Harding also was not involved in the legislative process and this can also be harmful. He did not complete his duty as president and therefore was not a good president. He also had a cabinet that would take advantage of him, and used him to apply there deeds. He was drinking during the time of prohibition, and he was gambling with his friends. This all in all shows that he was not an ethical man (which is not required by America, but is an appreciated quality), therefore he may not be the best person to rule America. Calvin Coolidge again was known to get the most sleep of all the presidents. He would sleep more than he was awake, and this shows that he was not being progressive and using his power as president to help other people. He did not predict nor foresee the Great Depression, and actually categorized America in a top spot and at its peak. Due to there apathy and unethical ways I agree with the Historians that these presidents were mediocre.
ReplyDeleteI agree and disagree at the same time with Gaurang's remarks. I agree with the facts of the presidents of the roaring 20's not being as successful as they could be however, I do not feel as though they were cCOMPLETELY dormaint. Firstly, harding, alhtough he was an alcoholic and had a gambling problem, He created the Naval petroreum Reserve which is still affective in todays society. I do not agree with his ways and I do,overall, feel as though he was not a productive president for the Untied States especially during this time period. Coolidge was known as the Laissez-faire president. He did indeed sleep for countless hours but he was far more productive than Harding. Many do not now that he was a strong opponent of child labor and imposed economic controls during WWI. He did not put into action his ideas and beliefs because during the 20's this was a responsibility of the state and local government. He also proposed reductions in federal expenditures and retiring some of the federal debt. There are many things people are unaware about these two presidents but all in all, they were not the best presidents in the history of the United States.
ReplyDeleteHm....
ReplyDeleteWell, I definitely agree with the mediocracy of the 1920's presidents. One of the greatest examples of this was president Harding, an old time politician of the 1920s. He was a man that only looked presidential, when in reality, he suffered from a serious case of less than intelligent mental capacity. He was always afraid to hurt peoples feelings, and out of his administration came Albert and Daughtery, some of the worst politicians. ..... ever. After he was done, Coolidge, a very silent and boring guy took the stand, making the twenties some of the most boring presidential times yet. Then with Hoover came the great depression, and because of his laissez-faire attitude, he didn't do much to help out the initial crash; again, yet another boring dude who even under extreme chaos did NOTHING. However, its impossible to deem them as completely uninteresting. Many of them had a completely different personality than was seen by the public. Harding as an example, was a poker player, a womanizer, and a heavy drinker. The presidents of the 20s were almost completely uninteresting while the rest of the country was hustling and bustling, but lets not forget that they hustled and bustled too! (just in private)
I can’t really blame historians for not looking very highly on any of these presidents, from Harding, to Coolidge to Hoover, there never really was an amazing president. To begin the era of mediocre presidents was probably the worst of them all, Harding. He made himself look like a perfect candidate on the outside be in reality he was man who drank during prohibition and slept with other men’s wives. He filled the cabinet up with all of friends, not if they were good political candidates and did favors for them that brought corruption into the government. His death led to Coolidge who wasn’t a corrupt president, but was just too shy to do anything. “Silent Cal” was like the president’s of the Gilded Age, and brought back the idea that he would just let Congress do it all. He thought trouble would disappear if you just did nothing…so that’s exactly what he did. He promoted Individualism and Associationalism, having the people take care of themselves and then helping each other and the government not doing a thing. Then comes Hoover. Hoover just brought on the Great Depression with his ideas of no fear and raising the tariff. So I do agree with historians, these president’s didn’t do anything to really help us, and one even led us to one of the most devastating events in history.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree, and I think that the presidents of the 1920s were mediocre and even lazy. Harding was eager to be a great president, but when it was harder than he imagined, he stopped trying. He drank during prohibition and even gambled with his “Ohio gang.” The president is supposed to be someone who represents the country. Laws shape the country therefore, the president should be loyal enough to abide by the law. A lot of corruption also occurred during Harding’s presidency; including, the Tea Pot Dome scandal. This scandal made Harding realize the corruption and he tried to redeem himself by going on a tour-- but he died. Coolidge left all decisions up to congress and though it made him seem lazy, the economy was doing great. Hoover was too cocky saying “I have no fears for the future of our country.” His idea of where the country was made the sudden depression paralyzing; Hoover’s inability to read the country made him a mediocre president.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the reason historians judge most of the presidents of the 1920's so harshly is largely due to their contributions towards the Great Depression. I do not think their mediocrity would have been so significant if their presidencies had taken place during a different time period. However, it is true that most of the presidents were largely self serving and did little to improve the countries welfare. After WWI, most of the fight had left the progressivism movement and the country became very indrawn and reverted to the theory of isolationism. This return to the conservative brought about a series of rather inactive presidents. Harding was elected in 1920 mainly due to his popularity not his merit. He had a pretty corrupt presidency as he basically felt overwhelmed by the job and therefore let his "Ohio gang" run the country. There were also quite a few scandals including the Tea Pot Dome scandal where he was forced to fire his secretary of interior, Albert Fall. He also increased the tariff making it very difficult for Europe to trade with the U.S. and therefore damaging both our and their economies. After Harding died, Coolidge, his VP, became president. Coolidge was also not very interested in running the country and actually spent more hours sleeping each day than he spent awake. He was also a big promoter of big business but believed the country would run best if individuals took care of themselves and he used this idea as a way to justify not helping the people. Hoover was elected president after Coolidge and while he was more successful than the two presidents before him, his raising of the tariff and hesitation to become involved in the welfare of the individual, was very damaging to the country at the beginning of the Depression.
ReplyDeleteI would agree with the above statement even though the time period may have had some effect on their presidency the fact that the presidents of the 1920s had a hands off policy didnt help. Harding who was the first president elected in the 1920s may have looked like a presidential candidate but was truly a plan fellow. He was elected more for his popularity. Harding had problems with drinking and was often more afraid of hurting people then doing what he thought was best. Harding did appoint some good politicians to his cabinet but at the same time his friends from the Ohio Gang were corrupt. Tariffs were increased making it hard to trade outside of the US. There were also scandals that occurred during Harding's presidency. One of them was the Tea Pot Scandal that forced Harding to fire secretary of navy Albert Fall who started leasing out land from the naval oil reserves in Wyoming. Harding died in 1923 after going on a public speaking tour. Calvin Coolidge, Harding's VP becomes the next president. Coolidge was nicknamed "Silent Cal" because he let congress decide on everything. Coolidge wanted to bring back passive occurrence to congress meaning the president doesnt do anything. This gave Coolidge more time to sleep. Which he spent more time doing then running the country. Coolidge believed the country would run the best if people took care of themselves so he didnt have to help the people. In the election of 1928 Herbert Hoover won. Hoover did more than Harding and Coolidge. One of his policies the Hawley Smoot Tariff which made a higher protective tariff to help assist farmer. Ended up being the highest protective tariff in the nations peacetime history. Which hurt the US in the long run, especially at the beginning of the Depression.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the presidents of the 1920's were not good leaders of our country. Like Gaurang said, Calvin Coolidge got the most sleep compared to all of the other presidents in America. This means that instead of using some of that time to try and improve our country, he was relaxing and getting over 12 hours of sleep. He also was so quiet and kept to himself, forcing congress to make all of the decisions. Harding was also a horrible president due to the fact that he had affairs with other married women while in the White House, he drank during prohibition as well as gambled with is friends the "Ohio Gang". These friends, Harding also appointed to be in his cabinet and picking them to hold very important political positions. This decision caused his presidency to be very corrupt. His so called friend stole government money and took advantage of Harding. These presidents of the 1920s were definitely not the best we have had and maybe even some of the worst
ReplyDeleteThe presidents of the 1920s were the ultimate men of their time. They suited the era, keeping an appearance of simplicity and straightforwardness, rarely challenging the status quo. Harding exemplified all the desirous qualities of an American man, at least in his public image. A large, overbearing figure, he said exactly what he meant, and did only what he wanted, which ended up being very little when the White House and the country were concerned. However, the country was at a moment where it did not seem to require much from its chief executive, so Harding, while not being effective, was very well liked across the country because of it. It was only until after his death that the underlying corruption and irreverence of his administration was revealed, just as it was only after Hoover and Coolidge's terms that we saw the result of having slack and/or ineffective administrations running a country. The Great Depression can be blamed upon the inadequacies of the presidents of the 1920s, but it is more realistic to also include the mentality of the population of the United States as a direct result. So while the presidents of the time were not preoccupied with getting much done, at the moment it seemed that not much had to be done. Rather than labeling them as bad presidents, maybe we should just refer to them as conformists.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the historians based on the fact that presidents of the 1920's implemented failed economic plans and were completely isolated from the problems the country faced. President Harding was a corrupt man whose cabinet is associated with corruption. He turned a blind eye to political injustice as he, himself did not honor a strict moral standard. He was known to drink during prohibition and have numerous affairs. His economic stances were a foundation for further problems as he did not recognize the problems with farmers and also did not discourage superfluous spending among Americans. President Coolidge advocated a laissez-faire economics and passive deference to Congress. He did not concern himself with the worsening conditions of farmers and vetoed a bill meant to aid them financially. He kept a status quo and therefore caused the country's economic condition to worsen. Hoover also carried on this approach of limited government intervention, wanting people to help each other out in times of need. Excess spending occurred, and the Hawley-Smoot tariff further limited overseas commerce, and hurt farmers. After the stock market fluctuated, it underwent a brief panic, and banks could not give loans so it crashed. When unemployment was high, Hoover still refused to offer government aid. It was not until FDR took office that the government supported the financial woes of the people and the depression was alleviated.
ReplyDeleteI would agree that the performance of the presidents of the 1920’s was second-rate. For example, Warren G. Harding was tall, handsome, and popular, but he had a mediocre mind. He could not distinguish the corruption within his administration and did not like to hurt people’s feelings. These are not qualities of a strong presidential rein. Under his administration, corporations would expand and anti-trust laws were not enforced or plain ignored. Another president, Calvin Coolidge was stern, calm, and a man of few words. He never spoke more than he needed to, and some would say he was a “boring” president. Coolidge vetoed a bill designed to help farmers, the McNary-Haugen Bill, twice. He also continued the policy of isolationism. Then comes Herbert Hoover, who had a sparkling personality, and went from poverty to prosperity. But Hoover was blamed for the Great Depression. These presidents seemed to bring more inferior ideas and actions to office than influential or helpful ones.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nina on the subject. The statement is true that these presidents were mediocre, but I think a lot of their mediocrity comes from their contributions to the Great Depression. This type of question brings up another question, "is it the man that makes the time period or the time period that makes the man?" In my opinion it is a little of both, yes the presidents were mediocre, and in some cases corrupt, but we would not put so much emphasis on their mistakes if it had not been for the depression that occurred soon after. However, there is no doubt that the presidents of this time were mediocre. The new conservative attitude in government after WWI set us up with some ineffective presidents. Harding was popular, but not necessarily qualified to be president, so he was elected but he basically let his "Ohio Gang" make his decisions. Harding wanted everyone to like him, but he contradicted the morals that he supported by drinking in the white house during prohibition and sleeping with the wives of many men. Harding increased the tariff, making it difficult for us to trade with other nations. After Harding died Coolidge took over, but did not make many changes to better the nation. Coolidge slept more than he worked and used a "laissez faire" attitude during his time as president, justifying it by saying that people should provide for themselves. So yes the presidents of the 1920s were mediocre, but several before them were as well, their mistakes are just emphasized because of the Great Depression.
ReplyDeleteHarding began the 1920s with altogether too much corruption and scandal; this is what set the stage for the Stock Market Crash and then the Great Depression. Because of the presidents during this area, society grew by itself, at first lifestyle flourished in the "roaring twenties" but then spiraled out of control because government failed to monitor many aspects of culture such as the reformation of monopolies or the mistreatment of laborers. Corruption was also revealed at an alarmingly high rate as Hardings spoils system stole government money and property. Coolidge only continued this trend of government disengagement and when society continued to grow the economy built on non-existant credit collapsed.
ReplyDeleteMediocre is a good description of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover. Hirding began the trend by merely appearing to be presidential, when in reality he was morally bankrupt. Drinking during prohibition and taking a less than active role in legislation and allowing the "ohio gang" to make the decisions for him. Following Harding was Coolidge. While he had a great slogan (keeping it cool with coolidge) he also had a great capacity for relaxing through his duties as president. While sleeping more than any other president ever had he also stuck too strongly to tradition when clear thinking was needed to anticipate the countries future. Hoover came in last and at a very unfortunate time as many of the countries troubles were blamed mostly on him. Hoover was too naiive to realize that the good times could not last forever and that the growing inflation of values would eventually collapse. While Hoover can be held responsible for the depression of the 30's, he most certainly could have done more to prevent the ultimate damages that it caused rather than continue an attitude of governmental laissez-faire well into theecnomic meltdown.
ReplyDeleteRetrospect is 20/20. Historians looking back on the 1920s see the mistakes then current presidents made, and what they could have done to prevent the economic disaster that was the early 1930s. Wilson served out the end of khis progressive term and passed the presidential torch onto Warren G. Harding in 1921. Harding was nominated by the republican party not for his intelligence or political skill, but because he would make a fantastic puppet. The american public fell in love with his charm and appearance, but were shocked after his death to learn of how full his office was of corruption. Calvin Coolidge took office after Harding's death, and as it has been mentioned several times, slept more than any other president. He was known for his quiet manner, and generally wasn't a "go-getter." After Coolidge came Hoover. The american public held him wholly to blame for the economic troubles beginning in 1929. So much so that signs of the poverty the nation was enduring were given names such as "Hoover Flags", "Hoovervilles" and "Hoover Blankets." (an out turned pocket, tent cities, and newspaper.) I would agree that presidents of the 1920s were completely mediocre.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the statement that the presidents of the 1920s are mediocre. Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover were not attentive to the nation's economy. They allowed big buisness to prosper and flourish with little or no government oversight or regulatory supervision. As a result, the nation's financial stability was overstated and its value undermined, resulting in the Great Depression and stock market crash of 1929. These presidents were basically asleep at the wheel as the leader of the nations heretofore more prosperous nation. It also does not help that Harding was part of the "Ohio Gang" and involved with the Teapot Dome scandal, Coolidge was elected based on popularity rather than merit, and Hoover was president when the Great Depression began and the country's social, political, and most importantly, economic state spiral downward. For these reasons, and more, the presidents of the 1920s may be classified as "mediocre."
ReplyDeleteThe 1920's was a decade of new prosperity and technology that improved the lives of americans. The majority of the people didn't care to pay much attention to the government after returning from World War I and preferred to focus on the new technology and trends like automobiles and radios. This is probably why Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover could get away with their laziness in office. President Harding had a corrupt cabinet with some of his friends that led to issues down the road. Gambling, affairs, and drinking during prohibition are all activities that Harding participated in. After Harding died in 1923, Calvin Coolidge, the vice president, came into office. He didn't take action on important issues so the big decisions of the nation were pretty much all made by congress. Coolidge also slept a lot and failed to recognize the economic crisis on the horizon due to all the american spending without credit. Hoover was in office during the beginning of the great depression and believed that this was just one of the cycles america's economy went through. If Hoover had faced reality earlier and helped the poverty stricken nation, the suffering of the people would have been decreased by some amount. Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover were all presidents who didn't do much to improve the nation and can be held somewhat responsible for the awful effects of the Great Depression.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree with the above statement, as Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover were all very mediocre presidents (even if they were fairly interesting people). Moving into the 20s, President Harding presented himself as the people's president, and wanted to make himself the most popular president ever. But the pressures of being president got to him, and that, along with his poor cabinet appointments, his 'friends' in the Ohio Gang, and his drinking, affairs, and gambling led his administration being very corrupt. Following Harding, Coolidge was hardly better. As Gaurang said, he slept more than any other president, and hardly did anything to improve the nation. And last but not least, Hoover may have tried to do the most to help, but he raised the tariff to 60% with the Hawley-Smoot Tariff in 1930, which made it near impossible for Europe to trade with America, which ended up hurting both economies. Hoover also predicted a great future for his country, just before the Great Depression began, and he was slow to act to try to improve the state of our economy after the stock market crash. While it's not fair to say that Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover were completely uninteresting people, they were very mediocre presidents who didn't do much during their administrations to help our country.
ReplyDeleteI think that placing the presidents of the 1920s in the politically mediocre category is fitting. Politically, these men did not do anything fairly interesting. Harding won the election of 1920 and everyone saw it as a return to "normalcy." Although Harding did have some good people in his administration like Andrew W. Mellon, he was still not that great of a president. Mellon worked hard at trying to lower the tax rate and in doing that, it would help in reducing the huge federal debt from World War I. However, Harding was a people pleaser and though he appeared to be respectable, he was actually a smoker, drinker, gambler, and womanizer in (and probably out) of the White House. Then in 1923 when Coolidge took office after Harding's death, the country became more idle. Coolidge was extremely laissez-faire when it came to the country and slept more than any other president. Coolidge was also very conservative and wanted to bring back the Golden Age. But by the time of the election of 1928, Hoover was elected president and stated that "[He has] no fears for the future of our country." Then,on October 29, 1929 the stock market crashed. Hoover's original plans were to lower taxes for the lower class and promote African American rights. Hoover though was thoroughly blamed for the Great Depression and there was not much that he did to try and fix the economy of that time.
ReplyDeleteI agree with historians look at the presidents during the 1920's. For example, Harding, during his presidency there were corruption because he brought in his "ohio gang" similar to what Grant did during his presidency leading to corrupt government officials. Although Harding did have some good judgement when picking hoover and Hughes. While when picking Mellon his judgement failed. Mellon raised the tariff to 35% which made it extremely difficult for Britain and France to pay back debts. Those countries put a pressure on Germany to pay back the war debt which led a loaf of bread to cost $480 million german marks. The tariff that mellon chose to make led to a recession because America loaned out so much money.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a little unfair because presidents are often judged by how the country is doing at the time and it may or may not be the president's fault if the country is doing badly. However, as president it is their job to help the country if it is not doing well. For example, Harding could have passed laws to curb the over-spectulation that helped lead to the Great Depression. Harding could have also kept his word and made a tarriff that was lower and allowed foreign economies to recover and give lower prices to America. Also, Hoover, could have left behind his laissez-faire and limited government techniques and adapted sooner to the circumstances of the Great Depression. Many of his projects, if implemented sooner, could have had bigger impact.
ReplyDeleteI agree and disagree the president of the 1920’s were mediocre, but then some important documents were passed through this time. Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover did not may that much attention the nation’s economy I agree, but this helped people realized we do not want people in office like this. Sometimes the only way you can learn from things is if someone does something wrong. All of the presidents in the 1920’s allowed big business to prosper with hardly any government supervision. As a result of no government involment the Great Depression and stock market crash of 1929. It does not help that Harding was part of the “Ohio Gang” and the Teapot Dome scandal, Coolidge elected just because he was popular, and Hoover was elected during the Great Depression. The presidents of the 1920’s may have not been the best but they showed us how we need to shape America.
ReplyDeleteI agree with lakia. some of the presidents of the 1920's were not really sufficient. Harding, as we all know was not the best president of all time. he was a gambler and alcoholic, and last but not least he cheated and had many mistresses. also in many cases presidents are the direct representation of our country. Coolidge on the other hand, was all about laizze faire. Due to that,some cases and circumstances can be good and some can be bad. in this case, he wanted the nation to makes its own decisions and he desired that congress had responsibility to fix economical problems.
ReplyDeleterespectively, i think that over time may presidents have learned from mistakes that were made in the past. the ones that we chose for the 20th century werent so bright. but i feel as though over time we will progress and come to better conlusions and plans than before.
I agree with Kansas about the presidents being both mediocre and not mediocre. I think the presidents during this time did not produce much change and didn't bring a large amount of good things, but they did have somewhat of an impact. A lot of laws were passed during this time that did make a change. I do agree with Lucy as well, in the sense that it is unfair to judge the president based on how the country is doing. This was an extremely tough time for our economy so it must have been a very hard job as a president to help the nation recover. There were definately stuff that could have been differently to help the country though. But like it's been said before it's helpful to learn from mistakes in order to make things better in the future. Which is one of the main reasons we even study history, to learn from mistakes.
ReplyDeleteI think the presidents of this time were actually better than average presidents, they were either just out of there time, or they were blamed for things that were not there fault.
ReplyDeletePS This site showed up as down since Friday for me. How were others able to reach the site and write on this?
The Presidents of this time period were definitely involved in a hands-off pattern that was not broken until FDR came in the 1930's. The presidents were very against change and just wanted things to run smoothly. Instead of trying to fix existing problems, they just stopped more from popping up. Hoover was known for his horrible leadership through a depression and Coolidge was know for sleeping more than any other president in history. they all allowed big business to run wildly without restrictions and the presidents during the 20's were overall not as effective as they should have been and are therefore mediocre
ReplyDelete