Who is the worst president
Executive summary
Professional historians consistently point to James Buchanan as the single worst U.S. president in the canonical scholarly polls because his inaction and decisions in the run-up to the Civil War are judged catastrophic, while recent partisan and crowd-driven rankings have elevated Donald J. Trump into the conversation as among the worst depending on methodology and timeframe [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. The traditional consensus: Buchanan as the archetypal “worst” president
Multiple longstanding scholarly surveys and journalistic summaries place James Buchanan at the bottom of presidential rankings because his administration failed to check the spread of slavery, embraced policies that intensified sectional tensions, and left the Union on the brink of collapse by 1861 — a judgment repeated in the C‑SPAN and Siena-style surveys and summarized by outlets tracking historians’ views [1] [2] [5].
2. Why historians single out Buchanan: crisis mishandling and context
The core charge against Buchanan in scholarly rankings is not mere unpopularity but catastrophic consequence: his handling of Dred Scott–era politics and refusal to confront Southern secessionism are judged to have materially worsened the nation’s gravest crisis, a specialist judgment that resurfaces across historian-driven lists [1] [5].
3. The rising entry: Trump’s appearance near the bottom in modern surveys
Recent surveys and compilations — including versions of the APSA/Presidential Greatness Project and media summaries of a 2024‑style academic poll — put Donald Trump unusually low, with one 2024 edition giving him a strikingly low composite score and other polls placing him at or near last depending on which cohort of scholars and which metrics were used [4] [3] [6].
4. Different questions, different “worst” answers: methodology matters
Which president is “worst” depends heavily on the metric: long‑term institutional damage and crisis mismanagement favor Buchanan in historians’ rankings [1] [5], whereas contemporaneous judgments that weigh moral authority, adherence to democratic norms, and post‑term criminal exposure have driven Trump’s rapid fall in some more recent surveys and news analyses [3] [7]. Aggregations that mix public polls, historians, and partisan respondents produce divergent lists — U.S. News’ composite placed Buchanan at the bottom in its 2025 synthesis even as other lists promoted different names [2].
5. Partisan and popular lists: a separate conversation with different incentives
Crowd‑rankings and partisan org charts can reflect current political animus or ideological scoring rather than dispassionate historical assessment; critics of ranking methodology note potential liberal or conservative biases in who is surveyed and which attributes are emphasized, and commentators have explicitly called out ideological splits in how figures like George W. Bush and others are rated [4] [5].
6. The balanced verdict: the most defensible historical answer today
Given the weight historians place on a president’s consequences for the republic over time, the most defensible single answer from professional historical surveys remains James Buchanan as the “worst” president; however, recent scholarly and public polling demonstrates that contemporary controversies — notably those surrounding Donald Trump — have pushed him into the bottom tier in many modern rankings, meaning any definitive label depends on whose criteria are used [1] [5] [3] [4].
7. What this debate hides: implicit agendas and how to read rankings
Rankings often serve present political narratives: lists produced by partisan outlets or crowd sites can amplify current grievances and electoral aims, while academic surveys reflect disciplinary standards; readers should therefore treat “worst president” claims as contingent findings shaped by methodology, the composition of respondents, and the specific attributes being measured rather than immutable truth [4] [5].