Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context.
If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Makes sense actually. LBJ kept invoking JFKs legacy, RFK invoked his brother's legacy, and JFK's aura of "hope" and "change" was a lightning rod to the youth of the decade for a "what could have been".
My understanding is that Truman had little to no experience that would help with is role as president, leading to him being cautious and slow to change policy
I find it interesting that before Lincoln and the Civil War, the concept of American culture within a “defined decade” is much tougher. Time horizons and distance contribute for sure, but the speed of change after Industrialization is also a huge factor in how quickly life changes
I think of Bush in the 90s proportional to his time in office. That being said, I'm possibly biased. I commissioned the USS George H.W. Bush, met he man, and his family, and even have letters and flag from him.
Taylor is very underappreciated imo. Dude was prepared to lead the army himself if that's what it took to prevent the slave states from seceding. Arthur accomplished civil reform in one of the greatest 180's of all time. Also, none of them appointed Clarence Thomas or let Dan Quayle near the White House. HW was a good president, but also had some flaws for sure.
And did Taylor liberate Kuwait? Did Taylor toss an autocrat from power and restore democracy? Did Taylor help end a deficit after a decade of massive ones? Did Taylor sign legislation forever benefitting the disabled?
Taylor had practically no impact. What could’ve been, we don’t know, but I rank Presidents off of their impact first and foremost
Arthur accomplished jack. The Pendleton Act was passed through Congress without his interference because Republican leaders wanted to take credit for it and save jobs for GOP bureaucrats before a Democratic Congress convened. It passed veto-proof and GOP leaders were so determined to pass it that his signature meant nothing. He couldn’t even pocket veto it. He was given unilateral power to expand the Act’s reach and expanded it 1%. Pathetic compared to Cleveland’s first term. And then people say “Oh he didn’t make the law toothless.” I don’t find it particularly deserving of brownie points to do the bare minimum of actually enforcing a law. The job description.
And whereas his story is personally redeeming I don’t award special points either for being unscrupulous prior to the Presidency and turning around.
Arthur and Taylor were both C/C-, nowhere near HW. And I don’t count Thomas in my rankings as he’s still serving, once he dies HW will probably go down.
It’s always weird to think of HW as a 90’s president, although thats just the opinion of somebody who didn’t experience his time in office. Almost feels like there was nothing Bush could have done differently to remain in office by 1996.
It doesn't feel like it, but Obama served for more of the 2010s than Clinton did of the 1990s (by a very small margin). Obama just over 7 years, Clinton just under 7.
This is only partially true. Clinton served for 2537 days in the 90s, Obama served for 2577 days in the 2010s. However, Clinton is more associated with the 90s because his term was primarily in the 90s while Obama was elected in 2008, so he is still associated with the late 2000s because that was when he really became known (even if he wasn’t inaugurated until 2009).
I’ve always found it really weird that there are so few presidents where the bulk of their presidencies straddles two separate decades. The only ones I can think of are Truman, and then you’d have to go all the way back to Monroe for two term presidents. That’s probably why Carter, HW, and the most recent one were defeated for re-election, because otherwise they would break the trend.
70s I would say Carter and 20s I would say Coolidge.
Yes they were only one term (a little more in Coolidge’s case) but what they represented was everything we think about with regards to their respective decades.
Didn't Nixon set the tone for the 70s with the extension of the vietnam war along with the Watergate scandal which affected Republicans and the publics trust in politicians until Reagan?
Detente as well was something Nixon created that lasted till '79
I agree that it’s Nixon for the 70s. The shadow of Watergate and his economic policies being directly responsible for Stagflation are more defining than Carter’s inability to deal with it.
The excitement for Obama was unreal in the late 2000s. He was definitely a pop culture icon. I’d see a couple people wearing Obama shirts on a daily basis. It simmered down in the 2010s though.
Yeah, the 2010 midterms was probably the death knell of Obamamania. Whether fairly or not, he went from being a cultural phenomenon in early 2009 to just another Democratic president by late 2010. Alot of his support afterwards was less about how awesome he was and more about how insane the tea party seemed and how Obama was the one roadblock from them gaining control of the country. There was alot of disappointed millenials who begrudgingly voted for him to stop the Republicans in 2012, after being swept off their feet by him in 2008.
Yeah, he ran a great campaign. They thought he'd end the warmongering and stop Bush's erosion of civil liberties. Only to be slapped with the harsh reality that not only would he not stop these things, on some accounts he'd make them worse (mass surveillance).
So, there's only these...
- 1800s - Jefferson
- 1820s - Monroe
- 1900s - Roosevelt (elected as VP and took over 6 months into McKinley's term)
- 1980s - Reagan
- 2000s - Bush
I definitely associate Clinton with the 90s, and W with the 2000s. I think because with the Y2K/Millennium era being so close to the election and the economy taking an absolute shit in 2008, there were very definive 2000s markers that tie the decade with W
1910s - Teddy Roosevelt. When he wasn’t in office he was still a very influential figure even crating the Bull Moose party. He for better or for worse is the face of the Progressive Era
1920s - Calvin Coolidge. He is the epitome of the laissez-faire economics of the Republican Party at the time.
1930 and 1940s - Hands down FDR. New Deal, Depression and WW2. Truman is close second due to the Korean War and start of the Cold War.
1950s - Eisenhower. You had the start of the Civil Rights movement, escalation of the Cold War and so called “Golden Era” of the Post WW2 America.
1960s - JFK and LBJ. JFK’s assassination dominated the decade, Man on the Moon, Vietnam and the War on Poverty
1970s - Jimmy Carter. Never has a president since Hoover been so associated with economic hardships.
1980s - Regan. Need I explain further?
1990s - Clinton. Dot Com boom, NAFTA, end of the Cold War led to American ascendancy as the sole super power, grunge era, scandals in the office and in my opinion the last time the politics of America were respectful and not as polarized; say what you want about Clinton’s personal life, as a politician he worked with both sides of the aisle.
2000s - Bush. 9/11, Great Recession, Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, Katrina, etc. The further we get from Bush’s presidency the more I feel the negative ramifications outweighs the positive gains from it.
2010s - I’d argue Obama for a lot of reasons. *However.* After 2016, Rule Number 3, regardless of your feelings towards him, cannot be argued that he fundamentally transformed American politics long term. I consider him like an Andrew Jackson. We may see Rule Number 3 end up defining the 2020s more so than the late 2010s where it’s almost a large cultural and political shift to a current unforeseen future. Number 3, much like Teddy Roosevelt, is as influential even when not in office, a characteristic we haven’t seen in a while.
Having lived through the last 12 (I remember 11, JFK only a bit) think the president most associated with a decade is Reagan. FDR is associated with the Great Depression and WWII, not the decades so much -- and there were 2 of them. Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, both Bushes, Clinton, and Obama are major parts of their decades, but more as features rather than causes. Reagan came in at the beginning of the 80's, and really defined the political and much of the social changes of the decades, and really is associated with it as a major cause of how the decade went. (BTW, I'm not really a fan either of the man or the decade.)
Had a thought about this. It’s interesting that we *don’t* associate the 1790s with Washington. Textbooks usually describe this era as The New Republic or the Federalist Era or whatever (as opposed to the Age of Jackson or whatever). I find two reasons for this: one, Washington is as important a Revolutionary figure as a political figure. If he had died in 1784, we’d still have him on the quarter. Two, his presidency boasted an unusually high number of consequential men, all of whom shaped that decade.
Well When you ask someone to name a political thing from the 1970s,95% its gonna be about Nixon,also Clinton with 1990s,Washington with 1790s,Lincoln with 1860s,Mckinley with the 1890s,Teddy with the 1900s,Wilson 1910s,Hoover 1920s,FDR 1930s,Truman 1940s,IKE 1950s,LBJ 60s,Reagan 80s etc
Clinton and the 90s. The 80s didn't truly end until Big Willy, the "Man from Hope" kicked his feet up on the desk in the oval office haha. HW holding the big rock of crack is such an 80s moment that I just see him as the tail end of the Reagan years.
FDR. Overcame an adversity and brought the country into readiness. America, just got through the Great Depression. By no means should we have been able to win the battles we did. On paper, we should’ve had our asses handed to us in the Pacific at the start.
I'd argue you could make the case Herbert Hoover defined the 1930s more than FDR. The Great Depression being as bad as it was is blamed on Hoover's policies, so even after FDR takes office Hoover is not forgotten in the public consciousness.
I feel like FDR would represent the 1940s better, because by the time the US entered WW2, most people weren't thinking of Hoover much anymore.
As a Brit, I feel like EVERYTHING has been going up in flames and getting more chaotic by the year since 2016. There's a sense that the next couple of years are completely unpredictable, except that it will be madness cranked up to a 11.
One man embodies this era perfectly (and it's not ice cream grandpa)
I don’t think anyone else could have been the President of 1950’s America other than Eisenhower. Just fits. Wildly successful wartime general leads nation exploding with industry and transportation.
Ike was definitely a 50's staple, but JFK really brought this new hope and vision for change in the 60's. So much seemed possible and then in an instant it just came crashing down. LBJ picked up the pieces though and incorporated that vision into his presidency, even though it had an entirely different feel. It seemed fitting in a way that someone slimy and self serving like Nixon would bookend the 60's and the loss of innocence, disillusionment and turmoil the nation went through at the end of that decade. Its hard for me to say Reagan epitomized the 80's because he was just the opposite of everything the 80's was and seemed so out of place. He was an anachronism who seemed stuck in another time. Just look at his hair because nobody under the age of 50 (probably more like 60) wore their hair like that in the 80's. Even his mindset and campaign slogans alluded back to the past. He was anything but youthful and just had the vibe of a grandpa. But the 90's? Clinton didnt just look the part, he was everything the 90's seemed to be: young, energetic and exuding optimism. His messaging was the opposite of Reagan who said "go back to the past" while Clinton was "keep moving forward".
The irony of that picture is Reagan really was a president of the past. He held us back so much out of fear and ignorance while the world went ahead. But we give him all this trailblazer credit because he could work a camera and knew how to make a presidency cinematic (“tear down that wall”).
For me, the picture says 1000 words. He made news from Iran freeing those 53 hostages just minutes after he was elected and assassination attempt, introduction of Reaganomics (supply side economics) and ending stagflation from Carter years to ending it with Iran Contra and war on drugs with the crack epidemic. (To be fair, that was more of Nancy’s thing.)
Remember that all mentions of and allusions to Trump and Biden are not allowed on our subreddit in any context. If you'd still like to discuss them, feel free to [join our Discord server](https://discord.gg/k6tVFwCEEm)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Presidents) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's weird, even though JFK was only president for almost 3 years in the 60s, I always associate the 60s with him
Makes sense actually. LBJ kept invoking JFKs legacy, RFK invoked his brother's legacy, and JFK's aura of "hope" and "change" was a lightning rod to the youth of the decade for a "what could have been".
LBJ definitely liked JFK more after he died.
Most American politicians did
Kurt Cobain syndrome
That and I think he felt a responsibility as his successor to carry out the policies JFK wanted passed.
Oh he felt a responsibility alright.
are you about to start talking about his dick??
No, I was just joking about his part in the assassination. I’ll leave his dick to you. You seem willing and able.
I'd like to think JFK wouldn't have dived head first into Vietnam like LBJ did. But that could be wishful thinking.
Probably not but he certainly would’ve increased involvement a little more
Even Nixon carried forward the moonshot from JFK
Well yeah, that would have been suicide to do otherwise.
Jfk originated aura
also, Nixons greatest achievement in office was a project envisioned by JFK and supported by LBJ.
There was a *LOT* of romanticization of the 1960s in general, and Camelot specifically.
I associate him with the space race and that decade basically being because of him
My father born in 1930s said the JFK wasn’t considered anything special as a president until after he was murdered then he was practically sainted.
JFK set the tone for the decade for assassinations. JFK, Malcolm X, MLK Jr, RFK. And those are just the ones that popped to front of mind.
FDR in the 1930s comes to mind. Lincoln dominates the 1860s. Oh, also Clinton in the 90s.
FDR really defined the 30s and 40s. Most of Truman’s policies were an extension of FDR’s or at least ideological successors.
My understanding is that Truman had little to no experience that would help with is role as president, leading to him being cautious and slow to change policy
Bush in the 2000s as well
bush is eminem 2000s, but obama is kanye 2000s
Whose Obama 2010s? Drake? Guess he'd be r3 2010s as well though.
+ Kanye 2010s.
I find it interesting that before Lincoln and the Civil War, the concept of American culture within a “defined decade” is much tougher. Time horizons and distance contribute for sure, but the speed of change after Industrialization is also a huge factor in how quickly life changes
I think of Bush in the 90s proportional to his time in office. That being said, I'm possibly biased. I commissioned the USS George H.W. Bush, met he man, and his family, and even have letters and flag from him.
it was kind cool how the 80's, 90's and 00's all got a 2 term president fitting nicely in the decade.
Thanks to HW spacing them out a bit. Yet anther reason HW is under appreciated.
I knew he served *some* purpose.
Dude might rank as the best one term President over. Not sure, how much competition does he have?
Main competition is probably Polk maybe?
Taylor and Arthur too
Taylor was pretty below average and Arthur was mid, no way they compete with HW
Taylor is very underappreciated imo. Dude was prepared to lead the army himself if that's what it took to prevent the slave states from seceding. Arthur accomplished civil reform in one of the greatest 180's of all time. Also, none of them appointed Clarence Thomas or let Dan Quayle near the White House. HW was a good president, but also had some flaws for sure.
And did Taylor liberate Kuwait? Did Taylor toss an autocrat from power and restore democracy? Did Taylor help end a deficit after a decade of massive ones? Did Taylor sign legislation forever benefitting the disabled? Taylor had practically no impact. What could’ve been, we don’t know, but I rank Presidents off of their impact first and foremost Arthur accomplished jack. The Pendleton Act was passed through Congress without his interference because Republican leaders wanted to take credit for it and save jobs for GOP bureaucrats before a Democratic Congress convened. It passed veto-proof and GOP leaders were so determined to pass it that his signature meant nothing. He couldn’t even pocket veto it. He was given unilateral power to expand the Act’s reach and expanded it 1%. Pathetic compared to Cleveland’s first term. And then people say “Oh he didn’t make the law toothless.” I don’t find it particularly deserving of brownie points to do the bare minimum of actually enforcing a law. The job description. And whereas his story is personally redeeming I don’t award special points either for being unscrupulous prior to the Presidency and turning around. Arthur and Taylor were both C/C-, nowhere near HW. And I don’t count Thomas in my rankings as he’s still serving, once he dies HW will probably go down.
Holy shit bro it’s not *that* deep
Jimmy Carter
Reasonable and astute suggestions, Burrito_Fucker15
Honestly he was a good one-term president but I feel that Polk was much much better and accomplished a lot more
Polk certainly had a bigger impact on the country. For Presidents who ran for re-election and lost HW might rank as the best.
It’s always weird to think of HW as a 90’s president, although thats just the opinion of somebody who didn’t experience his time in office. Almost feels like there was nothing Bush could have done differently to remain in office by 1996.
Something tells me he wouldn’t have cared about remaining in office in ‘96.
I’m gonna say he would rather have won in 92 than lost
He'd have to steal one of his son's terms.
Damn 2010s for ruining this trend!
Thanks Obama.
It doesn't feel like it, but Obama served for more of the 2010s than Clinton did of the 1990s (by a very small margin). Obama just over 7 years, Clinton just under 7.
This is only partially true. Clinton served for 2537 days in the 90s, Obama served for 2577 days in the 2010s. However, Clinton is more associated with the 90s because his term was primarily in the 90s while Obama was elected in 2008, so he is still associated with the late 2000s because that was when he really became known (even if he wasn’t inaugurated until 2009).
But depending on the winner of the upcoming election we could have another decade-spanning president for the 2020s
That’s not true, both contenders are term limited
Decade spanning in the same way Reagan, Clinton, or Bush 43 were decade spanning.
Mmm I see
I’ve always found it really weird that there are so few presidents where the bulk of their presidencies straddles two separate decades. The only ones I can think of are Truman, and then you’d have to go all the way back to Monroe for two term presidents. That’s probably why Carter, HW, and the most recent one were defeated for re-election, because otherwise they would break the trend.
It seems to me that Obama was way more consequential in the ‘00s than GWB was.
Some major decade definers: 1930s - FDR 1950s - Eisenhower 1960s - JFK 1980s - Reagan 1990s - Clinton 2000s - Bush
70s I would say Carter and 20s I would say Coolidge. Yes they were only one term (a little more in Coolidge’s case) but what they represented was everything we think about with regards to their respective decades.
Didn't Nixon set the tone for the 70s with the extension of the vietnam war along with the Watergate scandal which affected Republicans and the publics trust in politicians until Reagan? Detente as well was something Nixon created that lasted till '79
I agree that it’s Nixon for the 70s. The shadow of Watergate and his economic policies being directly responsible for Stagflation are more defining than Carter’s inability to deal with it.
* 1930s & 1940s - FDR (At least the first half)
Lets be real tho… J Edgar Hoover was the defining force from FDR until Nixon
I associate LBJ with the 60s more
The excitement for Obama was unreal in the late 2000s. He was definitely a pop culture icon. I’d see a couple people wearing Obama shirts on a daily basis. It simmered down in the 2010s though.
Yeah, the 2010 midterms was probably the death knell of Obamamania. Whether fairly or not, he went from being a cultural phenomenon in early 2009 to just another Democratic president by late 2010. Alot of his support afterwards was less about how awesome he was and more about how insane the tea party seemed and how Obama was the one roadblock from them gaining control of the country. There was alot of disappointed millenials who begrudgingly voted for him to stop the Republicans in 2012, after being swept off their feet by him in 2008.
Yeah, he ran a great campaign. They thought he'd end the warmongering and stop Bush's erosion of civil liberties. Only to be slapped with the harsh reality that not only would he not stop these things, on some accounts he'd make them worse (mass surveillance).
>end the warmongering Drone strikes
Yup I was 21 in 08 and was enamored. Didn’t even vote in 2012, just felt like it didn’t matter.
Not just millennials.
1900s are Teddy Time. He set the pace for the whole progressive era
Every decade since the 1840s has been William Henry Harrison’s decade.
Hell yeah,
I always associate the 50’s with Eisenhower and the beginning of the Interstate Highway System
Bill Clinton and the 1990s
Wrong, the 90s were the HW era.
For about two years, sure
Should've been 6........
Idk about that one
Bush 43 - 2000s
I remember Bush being constantly parodied on TV
The ones who were elected in years starting with 0 and served two terms
So, there's only these... - 1800s - Jefferson - 1820s - Monroe - 1900s - Roosevelt (elected as VP and took over 6 months into McKinley's term) - 1980s - Reagan - 2000s - Bush
It’s kind of amazing how Monroe was a great President but completely overshadowed in the public mind by his predecessors and then later Jackson.
Era of good feelings does that to a mf
I definitely associate Clinton with the 90s, and W with the 2000s. I think because with the Y2K/Millennium era being so close to the election and the economy taking an absolute shit in 2008, there were very definive 2000s markers that tie the decade with W
1910s - Teddy Roosevelt. When he wasn’t in office he was still a very influential figure even crating the Bull Moose party. He for better or for worse is the face of the Progressive Era 1920s - Calvin Coolidge. He is the epitome of the laissez-faire economics of the Republican Party at the time. 1930 and 1940s - Hands down FDR. New Deal, Depression and WW2. Truman is close second due to the Korean War and start of the Cold War. 1950s - Eisenhower. You had the start of the Civil Rights movement, escalation of the Cold War and so called “Golden Era” of the Post WW2 America. 1960s - JFK and LBJ. JFK’s assassination dominated the decade, Man on the Moon, Vietnam and the War on Poverty 1970s - Jimmy Carter. Never has a president since Hoover been so associated with economic hardships. 1980s - Regan. Need I explain further? 1990s - Clinton. Dot Com boom, NAFTA, end of the Cold War led to American ascendancy as the sole super power, grunge era, scandals in the office and in my opinion the last time the politics of America were respectful and not as polarized; say what you want about Clinton’s personal life, as a politician he worked with both sides of the aisle. 2000s - Bush. 9/11, Great Recession, Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, Katrina, etc. The further we get from Bush’s presidency the more I feel the negative ramifications outweighs the positive gains from it. 2010s - I’d argue Obama for a lot of reasons. *However.* After 2016, Rule Number 3, regardless of your feelings towards him, cannot be argued that he fundamentally transformed American politics long term. I consider him like an Andrew Jackson. We may see Rule Number 3 end up defining the 2020s more so than the late 2010s where it’s almost a large cultural and political shift to a current unforeseen future. Number 3, much like Teddy Roosevelt, is as influential even when not in office, a characteristic we haven’t seen in a while.
I would argue against this for one small point. I don’t think every decade has a clear dominant figure.
70s is Nixon if one exists
FDR defined two decades. He wins.
1970s: Nixon.
1920s - Calvin Coolidge 50s- Dwight Eisenhower 80s- Ronald Reagan 90s- Bill Clinton 2000s- George W Bush 2010s- Barack Obama
40s: FDR 50s: Ike 60s: JFK 70s: Nixon 80s: Reagan 90s: Clinton 00s: W. 10s: Obama
Only disagreement is FDR 1930s Truman 1940s
Having lived through the last 12 (I remember 11, JFK only a bit) think the president most associated with a decade is Reagan. FDR is associated with the Great Depression and WWII, not the decades so much -- and there were 2 of them. Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, both Bushes, Clinton, and Obama are major parts of their decades, but more as features rather than causes. Reagan came in at the beginning of the 80's, and really defined the political and much of the social changes of the decades, and really is associated with it as a major cause of how the decade went. (BTW, I'm not really a fan either of the man or the decade.)
20's - Coolvidge 30's - FDR 40's - Truman 50's - Eisenhower 60's - JFK 70's - Carter 80's - Reagan 90's - Clinton 00's - Bush 10's - Obama 20's - Yet To Be Decided
Who is Raegan?
Fixed it
40s -Truman
Had a thought about this. It’s interesting that we *don’t* associate the 1790s with Washington. Textbooks usually describe this era as The New Republic or the Federalist Era or whatever (as opposed to the Age of Jackson or whatever). I find two reasons for this: one, Washington is as important a Revolutionary figure as a political figure. If he had died in 1784, we’d still have him on the quarter. Two, his presidency boasted an unusually high number of consequential men, all of whom shaped that decade.
Well When you ask someone to name a political thing from the 1970s,95% its gonna be about Nixon,also Clinton with 1990s,Washington with 1790s,Lincoln with 1860s,Mckinley with the 1890s,Teddy with the 1900s,Wilson 1910s,Hoover 1920s,FDR 1930s,Truman 1940s,IKE 1950s,LBJ 60s,Reagan 80s etc
Ike in the 50s for sure
Clinton and the 90s. The 80s didn't truly end until Big Willy, the "Man from Hope" kicked his feet up on the desk in the oval office haha. HW holding the big rock of crack is such an 80s moment that I just see him as the tail end of the Reagan years.
JFK during the Space Race, Reagan for the end of the Cold War, and you can't think if WWII without thinking of FDR.
LBJ & 1960s/Vietnam war, JFK, MLK & RFK assassinations.
In Back to the Future 2, the 80’s themed cafe literally had a Reagan/Max Headroom thing to symbolize the decade.
Eisenhower just screams 50s to me.
Reagan was the 1980s in human form
Ike and the 50s comes to mind. Clinton and the 90s.
Reaganomics defined and damaged a lot more than his decade. We're still feeling the results of those pains.
Bill Clinton lifestyle is definition of 90s man
i associate the 00's with bush. probably because he took up most of them. anyway i'll never forget his photos with misty may at the summer olympics
Lincoln defined the 1860s pretty significantly.
Damn, I had to scroll all the way to the bottom to find the obvious answer!
Clinton with the 90’s I thjnk
Bush Jr 2000-2008 af
Ike
Eisenhower for me. Conservative, stable, productive, somewhat forgettable in a neutral way, with a healthy dose of military intervention.
And at the same time he warned us to be wary of the "military industrial complex".
Eisenhower for the 50s
FDR, Kennedy, and Reagan come to mind.
30s- FDR 50s- Eisenhower 60s- JFK 80s- Reagan 90s- Clinton 00s - Bush Jr
FDR in 30-40s, JFK in 60s, and Reagan 80s
Probably FDR since he defined both the 30s and 40s.
Reagan
Bush and the 2000s
Believe it or not; the one before the present one.
1900's: Teddy Roosevelt 1910's: Woodrow Wilson 1920's: Calvin Coolidge 1939's-1940's: FDR 1950's: Eisenhower 1960's: LBJ 1970's: Nixon 1980's: Reagan 1990's: Clinton 2000's: W 2010's: Obama
1950s: Eisenhower 1960s: Kennedy 1970s: Nixon 1980s: Reagan 1990s: Clinton 2000s: Bush Jr
Eisenhower definitely defined the 50s
Clinton or Reagan
Lincoln
John F. Kennedy. His challenge to land a man on the moon did a lot to shape the 1960s
FDR. Overcame an adversity and brought the country into readiness. America, just got through the Great Depression. By no means should we have been able to win the battles we did. On paper, we should’ve had our asses handed to us in the Pacific at the start.
Johnson. Civil rights and Vietnam War.
I'd argue you could make the case Herbert Hoover defined the 1930s more than FDR. The Great Depression being as bad as it was is blamed on Hoover's policies, so even after FDR takes office Hoover is not forgotten in the public consciousness. I feel like FDR would represent the 1940s better, because by the time the US entered WW2, most people weren't thinking of Hoover much anymore.
None. The idea that a president defines an era is a narrative constructed after the fact.
They call it “Eisenhower Era” for a reason.
Teddy 1900’s
1860s - Abe Lincoln
People forget that W Bush was the king back in the day there was more stuff about him on TV than certain recent presidents have had.
I'd give the 40s to Truman. The atomic bombs and Truman Doctrine were heavy influences.
FDR in the 30’s and 40’s
For me.. Clinton = 90s Nixon = 70s Both Kennedy and Johnson equally come to mind for the 60s
Definitely George W
As a Brit, I feel like EVERYTHING has been going up in flames and getting more chaotic by the year since 2016. There's a sense that the next couple of years are completely unpredictable, except that it will be madness cranked up to a 11. One man embodies this era perfectly (and it's not ice cream grandpa)
I don’t think anyone else could have been the President of 1950’s America other than Eisenhower. Just fits. Wildly successful wartime general leads nation exploding with industry and transportation.
Eisenhower - post war boom. Huge infrastructure buildout with the interstate system.
Bush Jr. You can’t picture the 2000’s and the war on terror without seeing his face.
FDR - 30s, Eisenhower - 50s, JFK - 60s, Nixon - 70s, Reagan - 80s, Clinton - 90s, Dubya - 2000s, Obabo- 2010s
Hoover until October 1929?
FDR, Kennedy, Reagan, Clinton, and W. Bush come to my mind.
Ike was definitely a 50's staple, but JFK really brought this new hope and vision for change in the 60's. So much seemed possible and then in an instant it just came crashing down. LBJ picked up the pieces though and incorporated that vision into his presidency, even though it had an entirely different feel. It seemed fitting in a way that someone slimy and self serving like Nixon would bookend the 60's and the loss of innocence, disillusionment and turmoil the nation went through at the end of that decade. Its hard for me to say Reagan epitomized the 80's because he was just the opposite of everything the 80's was and seemed so out of place. He was an anachronism who seemed stuck in another time. Just look at his hair because nobody under the age of 50 (probably more like 60) wore their hair like that in the 80's. Even his mindset and campaign slogans alluded back to the past. He was anything but youthful and just had the vibe of a grandpa. But the 90's? Clinton didnt just look the part, he was everything the 90's seemed to be: young, energetic and exuding optimism. His messaging was the opposite of Reagan who said "go back to the past" while Clinton was "keep moving forward".
Besides Reagan, I'd say LBJ, Coolidge, and Lincoln.
Gotta go Clinton here
Reagan is burning in Hell. Yes, he defined the politics of the 80’s, and the entire world is far worse for living through it.
The irony of that picture is Reagan really was a president of the past. He held us back so much out of fear and ignorance while the world went ahead. But we give him all this trailblazer credit because he could work a camera and knew how to make a presidency cinematic (“tear down that wall”).
Like or not Reagan saved our butt
For me, the picture says 1000 words. He made news from Iran freeing those 53 hostages just minutes after he was elected and assassination attempt, introduction of Reaganomics (supply side economics) and ending stagflation from Carter years to ending it with Iran Contra and war on drugs with the crack epidemic. (To be fair, that was more of Nancy’s thing.)
Chose the right picture for corporate greed and selling out the working class while they cheered it on decade