How does Reagan compare to other great presidents like FDR or Lincoln?

1. How the rankings stack up — Reagan’s place in the presidential canon

Multiple expert surveys and institutional rankings show Reagan commonly placed in the top 20, often between roughly 10th and 20th depending on methodology, while Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt are consistently rated first and second for their crisis leadership and accomplishments ^{[6] [1] [2]}. The 2024–2025 scholarly surveys cited place Lincoln highest on ability and FDR highest on accomplishments, with Reagan scoring strongly on political skills such as communication and party leadership but scoring lower on comparative measures of crisis-altering accomplishments and constitutional impact ^{[1] [2]}. These rankings reflect composite judgments across 20 attributes that include vision, public persuasion, appointments, and crisis leadership — domains where Lincoln and FDR dominate due to the Civil War and the New Deal/WWII eras ^[2].

2. Crisis leadership versus narrative mastery — different forms of greatness

Lincoln and FDR are defined by direct wartime and economic crisis decisions—Lincoln by preserving the Union and abolishing slavery during the Civil War, FDR by building the New Deal state and wartime mobilization—and historians judge those tangible institutional transformations as central to their greatness ^{[4] [2]}. Reagan’s presidency is characterized less by sweeping institutional reconfiguration and more by narrative construction and political repositioning: he framed the nation with a Cold War moral drama, reshaped conservative coalition politics, and influenced the ideological contours of subsequent GOP governance ^{[7] [8]}. Scholars identify that difference as a key reason Reagan ranks differently from Lincoln and FDR: he changed political direction and rhetoric rather than creating comparable permanent federal institutions or redefining constitutional order ^[5].

3. Policy substance and ideological roots — contrasting philosophical projects

The policy projects of these presidents differ fundamentally: FDR institutionalized a welfare/administrative state aimed at economic security and social programs, while Lincoln used executive power to preserve the nation and expand federal authority in service of abolition ^{[4] [5]}. Reagan advanced a conservative agenda grounded in ideas from economists like Milton Friedman and Hayek, favoring limited government, deregulation, and tax policy changes that reversed New Deal-era assumptions; historians emphasize Reagan’s role in shifting policy frameworks and party ideology rather than building new federal entitlements ^{[9] [5]}. This ideological contrast explains why evaluations of “greatness” separate crisis-driven accomplishments from long-term ideological impact: Reagan’s structural legacy is political and ideological, FDR’s and Lincoln’s are institutional and constitutional ^{[9] [5]}.

4. Communication and public persuasion — a shared presidential craft

Historians note a clear commonality: Reagan and FDR both mastered mass communication and crafted compelling national narratives that reframed public perceptions during difficult periods. FDR’s fireside chats and New Deal rhetoric and Reagan’s televised oratory and optimistic framing are cited as central tools that enabled policy agendas and public buy-in ^{[3] [8]}. Scholars argue that storytelling functioned differently for each: FDR used narrative to justify expansive federal interventions during depression and world war, whereas Reagan used narrative to delegitimize expansive government and to rebuild conservative confidence, illustrating how equivalent communicative skill can serve divergent policy ends ^{[3] [8]}.

5. What the surveys omit and why context matters

Quantitative rankings emphasize measurable attributes like accomplishments and leadership, but they can omit long-term ideological shifts, legal consequences, and partisan realignments that unfold over decades; Reagan’s largest effects—party realignment, judicial appointments, and discourse—are sometimes underweighted compared with FDR’s immediate institutional programs or Lincoln’s constitutional crisis management ^{[2] [5]}. Evaluations also depend on scholar samples, time of survey, and attribute weighting; for example, Siena and other surveys parse 20 attributes, producing rankings that reward wartime and domestic program achievements over rhetorical or party-building strengths, which helps explain consistent placement differences among Lincoln, FDR, and Reagan ^{[2] [1]}.

6. Bottom line — different kinds of presidential greatness with measurable differences

Comparing Reagan to Lincoln and FDR reveals distinct categories of influence: Lincoln and FDR rank highest for wartime crisis leadership and institution-building that reshaped constitutional practice and federal policy, whereas Reagan ranks high for political communication, party leadership, and ideological transformation that redirected American politics toward conservatism. Surveys and scholarly work consistently reflect these divisions, placing Reagan below Lincoln and FDR on composite greatness scales while recognizing his significant, enduring impact on American political life ^{[1] [8]}.