Why Coolidge Landed “Below Average” in the President’s Ranking

By Amity Shlaes

This piece originally appeared in the Coolidge Review email newsletter, which appears every other Thursday. To receive the newsletter — which features Shlaes’s latest insights and observations — simply enter your email address in the signup form at the bottom of this page.

Presidential rankings always stir up debate. The discussion becomes especially lively when the sitting president circulates a ranking of his own.

Last week, President Trump’s Truth Social account shared a ranking that labeled the president himself “The Greatest.”

The list raised questions, such as:

• Why were Ronald Reagan, both Bushes, and other recent presidents missing?

• Why was Woodrow Wilson rated “great”?

• And — the question we heard most at the Coolidge Foundation — why was Calvin Coolidge “below average”?

The next morning, the president’s account posted a graphic naming five presidents who “built America” and five who “broke” it. Reagan, missing the first time around, now appeared among the builders. Wilson, “great” the day before, landed among the breakers.

But what about Coolidge? Are we worried about his standing?

Not particularly.

Coolidge has generally risen in historians’ estimation. And whenever new rankings appear, admirers step forward to make his case.

Senator Mike Lee did just that, calling Coolidge the “greatest president of the 20th century” and “the most under-rated.”

Over the past decade, thousands of adults and students have come together at the Coolidge Foundation to learn about Coolidge, to teach him, and to study his values: restraint, sane federal budgeting, civility.

In the long run, Coolidge will prevail.

Amity Shlaes chairs the Coolidge Foundation, is the author of Great Society, and is a fellow of National Review Institute. She is at work on a history of the Gilded Age.