Rate the Presidents, Installment #22/24: Grover Cleveland

[JonathanSwift]

Grover Cleveland, 1885-1889; 1893-1897

Previous Results
Abraham Lincoln: 4.45 Stars
George Washington: 4.42 Stars
Chester A. Arthur: 3.8 Stars
Thomas Jefferson: 3.65 Stars
James Monroe: 3.57 Stars
John Quincy Adams: 3.5 Stars
James Madison: 3.23 Stars
Zachary Taylor: 3.15 Stars
James A. Garfield: 3.14 Stars
Ulysses S. Grant: 3.06 Stars
Martin Van Buren: 3.04 Stars
James K. Polk: 2.85 Stars
John Adams: 2.58 Stars
Andrew Jackson: 2.43 Stars
William Henry Harrison: 2.38 Stars
Millard Fillmore: 2.33 Stars
Rutherford B. Hayes: 2.15 Stars
John Tyler: 2.11 Stars
Andrew Johnson: 1.72 Stars
Franklin Pierce: 1.6 Stars
James Buchanan: 1.41 Stars

[Zioneer]

Fairly terrible, though I can sympathize with some of his reformist ideas, like weakening the spoils system and opposing Hawaii's annexation (though I would argue that Hawaii has become pretty remarkable as a US state).

Also, it bugs me that he's essentially counted as two presidents. Regardless of non-consecutive terms, he's still the same president.

[SWE]

Two stars. He was pretty awful, but not as bad as most other presidents. On one hand, he had what was probably the best foreign policy of any president, and his tariff reduction efforts were admirable. However, even considering that, I can't give him anything better than two stars, as I'm not a fan of murdering strikers, xenophobic immigration restrictions, supporting southern Apartheid, or his fetish for the gold standard.

[Mr. Smith]

Two stars, pretty much for reasons stated above.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Much like Arthur, quietly one of the best. I bump him up to five stars because he managed to accomplish all he did while facing some of the most aggressive opposition of any President.

[Maxwell]

Much like Arthur, quietly one of the best. I bump him up to five stars because he managed to accomplish all he did while facing some of the most aggressive opposition of any President.

Yep. This.

[ElectionsGuy]

5 stars

[JonathanSwift]

Final Result: 3.46 Stars

[Gass3268]

2*

Extremely overrated

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Would actually rate him three or maybe even four stars if he just had a first term. It was classic 19th century classical liberalism. Nothing to write home about, but it was all very competent. Bad on Chinese, Blacks, and kind of tight-fisted (typical gilded age lameness); but wisely fought against corruption, imperialism and tariffs.

Unfortunately the second term was absolutely awful, vetoing voting rights bills, didn't even manage to abolish McKinley Tariff properly, goldbuggery, being well-meaning but out-of-depth in Hawaii and of course the violent suppression of the Pullman strike. Throughout it all, he was consistently unable to control the situation and was generally useless. So bad that he pretty much killed the Bourbons and indeed mainstream classical liberalism for good. (No, I don't count Alton Parker as a resounding comeback)

[MATTROSE94]

3 stars.