America is so better off with Kennedy dead that it's not funny. He did exactly ONE thing. Cuban Missle crisis. And he did that well...I'll give credit when it's due. Other than that he made America even more racially divided than it was, and his legacy for taking a bullet or two or three to the head makes people love the idiot. Happy those two boys are gone. Teddy is smart he never ran again. Besdes who wants a corrupt killer in the White House?

Largely inconsequential in historical terms. A mediocre, at best, president, whose assassination has given him a cachet he does not deserve.

He was entranced by adventurism, which you'd think would endear him to Bush loyalists.

no no no no no kennedy was a great president. He knew what he was doing,just because he was forty-three didn't mean that he wasn't in OFFICE LONG ENOUGH. He was born and raised in politics! He knew what was up,and did great things he had more balls than you'd EVER have!

A piece of trash morally. A president that had two "great" earmarks in his short term. Civil Rights movement which was more a product of the times than the President and the Cuban Missile Crisis. And he almost messed that one up.

Some good policies and ideas, hes Civil Rights support came late and only due to fears about widespread black and pro-black rioting in American cities, not a true reformer like others of his time period, even less so than LBJ or his brother Robert.

Still a charismatic leader who left a lasting impact on the American psyche.

Because of his assassination on November 22, 1963, JFK's presidency and legacy was never totally realized. Dirt has been dug up on his personal life (womanizing). His health issues were a constant threat to his survival but were kept secret. He had a very bad back and also Addison's disease (adrenal gland withering) which could have killed him at any time. Technically he would not have qualified to run for president had it been known about the Addison's disease but the secret was kept under lock and key.

The Bay of Pigs was an inherited mess but he was blamed and he took responsibility. He did stand up to the Soviets during the Cuban missle crisis and won a lot of respect. His policies on Civil Rights and Vietnam were carried over to the Johnson era. Civil Rights progressed positively while Vietnam turned into a national tragedy (not necessarily the fault of Kennedy). The space program was successful and the Peace Corps was a monumental achievement. Tragically, we will never know how things might have turned out had he lived past November 1963.

A great president who was tragically assassinated very young.

If his brother had lived and been elected he would have been on this list. John was great because he truly understood a war was not in the best interest of anyone.

Overall he was a bad president. He was shallow, and basically unlearned. He always had daddy to bail him out of scrapes and buy his advances. His Cuban and Viet Nam policies still damage the United States to this day.

His death changed a generation, and I certainly give him credit for courage. He's pretty tough to rank for this list, however, since he didn't get to finish what he started. I think his reputation is built largely on what might have been rather than what actually was.

Let's give JFK credit for courage - he secretly suffered from enormous physical problems all his life, but kept quiet about it and kept pressing on. And given the kind of amoral upbringing he had, he really was a credit to his family, probably the best of the lot. His demeanor during press conferences was priceless: he knew how to have fun with the reporters, and he didn't act as though being president meant being a Monarch. Although I think he was a weak president overall, he was an improving one, which is very important. He was also a patriot. His response to the Cuban Missile Crisis was impressive. And he understood the value of tax cuts to help stimulate the economy. Democrats today like to identify themselves with Kennedy, but if he had been alive during the 1980s they would have reviled him as a boll weevil, and if he were alive today, giving the kinds of speeches he gave back then, the Democrats wouldn't want him at all. As one columnist said, the liberals remember him so fondly because they don't remember him so well. (for a more negative outlook, see my comments under U.S. Presidents)

Over rated son of a gangster.

As a leader he was above average. As a president, he was the most polarizing politician of his time with a boldness and brashness America found surprising. He didn't live long enough (or serve as president long enough) to truly evaluate his presidential leadership style, but certainly started many cataclysmal changes in motion from his stand on Civil Rights for blacks to his youth initiatives (Peace Corps). Whoever killed him (probably the US mafia) had many powerful sympathizers resulting in the most massive information cover-up since the beginning of the media age.

pretty mediocre when compared to either roosevelt, churchill, truman, nixon, reagan, or even clinton. he did have success in the cuban missile crisis, but that could have been averted if he had taken the soviets more seriously. perhaps he would have grown into the job in his second term, but at the time of his death his civil rights legislation was stalled even though his party led both houses of congress. to think that he would have not gotten his hands bloody in vietnam is misguided and naive; kennedy was a cold warrior who wrongly believed in the domino theory.

More style than substance, but he sure was a dynamic leader.

Fortunately, the myth of Camelot is beginning to fade away and the Kennedy presidency is beginning to be examined objectively in order to determine just how John F. Kennedy should be regarded as a leader. Despite my reputation as being somewhat "emotionally attatched" to Kennedy, I still manage to see things in perspective and realize that Kennedy had his faults, both in his public and private life (moreso in the latter). In this comment, I will attempt to clarify my position on Kennedy, and hope to achieve balance. I will first examine Kennedy's negative attributes, both as a leader and as a man, and then I will examine his strengths. [Negative Attributes:] (1) Although VirileVagabond and I, through our e-mails, have disagreed on the dynamics of the Bay of Pigs invasion, I do think that we agree on the overall issue itself: Kennedy was wrong to let the invasion go forth. And when he did give the CIA the green light for the invasion after he assumed office, Kennedy should've been willing to use all the resources of the U.S. military to ensure its success. While a report released in 1998 determined that the CIA misinformed Kennedy Administration officials, this is still no excuse. The Bay of Pigs was a major embarassment to U.S. prestige throughout the world, and it gave the world the impression that the Communists had the upper hand. Kennedy lacked the experience and the wisdom to realize that a covert paramilitary invasion of Cuba by a few thousand exhiles would not be enough to oust Castro. Kennedy was also wrong to underestimate the resolve of the Castro regime. While it can be claimed that the problems that the U.S. faced with regards to Cuba in 1961 were hardly any of Kennedy's making, he still must bear responsibiliy for the failure of the invasion. The buck stopped at Kennedy's desk, and the final decision to abort or proceed with the invasion rested with him. (2) The conflict in Vietnam had prompted President Eisenhower to send 800 military advisers to South Vietnam in an effort to train the South Vietnamese to win the war. Kennedy's strategy (or lack-there-of) was very much the same. During his tenure, Kennedy increased the number of military advisers to 16,700. The Kennedy mentality with regards to Vietnam was that the military advisers were there to train and equip the South Vietnamese with the tools that they needed to win their own war. Throughout his entire term, Kennedy resisted pleas from his advisers to send combat troops to the country. However, Kennedy made a grave mistake in approving the coup (although he did not approve the murder) of Vietnamese President Diem. Kennedy believed that Diem's corrupt government was slowing the war effort, and ousting him and replacing him with a cooperative leader would help expediate the withdrawl of U.S. militray personnel. Ironically, Diem's death resulted in the exact opposite. While Diem was a corrupt leader, he managed to ensure stability in the nation (and at the same time contained the conflict- there were only 82 American deaths in November of 1963). With Diem's death came a period of instability. The puppet government instilled by Lyndon Johnson was even more corrupt and lacked the moral authority to manage the war. The Diem assassination was an incentive for Lyndon Johnson to send combat troops into Vietnam to ensure that the South did not fall in the wake of Diem's death. While Kennedy may have persued other options, his actions provided the logic that made Johnson believe that sending U.S. combat troops into Vietnam would ensure stability. While its nice to believe that Kennedy would've avoided Johnson's course of action, the fact is that Kennedy's actions just weeks before his death is exactly what prompted Johnson to handle the war the way he did. Kennedy may have handled it differently had he lived, but in a real sense, LBJ's decision to send combat troops into Vietnam was a result of Kennedy's actions in Vietnam. (3) Kennedy, as we know now, had very little moral character. While he loved his wife, he still pursued his womanizing relentlessly, never considering the feelings of his wife, and moreover, never considering that if the affairs were made public, it would've been a huge embarassment for the United States. [Positive Attributes] (1) Kennedy brought a sense of hope and idealism to the American people at a time of great national peril. Through the Peace Corps, he encouraged young Americans to take an interest in world affairs. (2) Kennedy was a Cold Warrior who hated Communism. He cared deeply for foreign aid programs, and his establishment of the Alliance for Progress, while in the long-term proved to be ineffective, was good in that it attempted to combat Communist subversion in Latin America. (3) He responded well to the crises in Berlin and Cuba. In the latter, me and VirileVagabond have a dynamic disagreement. My research has determined that the missiles in Turkey were of a defensive nature- those conventional weapons were there in order to ensure the protection of an American ally that was in hostile territory (Turkey). The Soviets did the same with Cuba- they placed CONVENTIONAL weapons in Cuba. However, the Cuban Missile Crisis came when the Soviets followed up that conventional weapons buildup (defensive weapons) with an offensive weapons buildup and the introduction of MRBM nuclear missiles (much more powerful than those located in Turkey). In any event, Kennedy responsed well to the crisis and the crisis eventually led to improved relations between the two superpowers (at least for a time). (4) He pursued peace with the Soviet Union and worked hard for the passage of the historic Test Ban Treaty. Kennedy said just a few weeks before his death that the Test Ban Treaty was his most important accomplishment thus far. FINAL ANALYSIS: Kennedy's record is indeed a mixed one. He made a wrong call on the Bay of Pigs, and made a grave mistake in Vietnam just two weeks before his death. However, his resposne to the Missile Crisis and the crisis in Berlin was impressive, and he brought a sense of hope and idealism at a time of maximum danger. However, the man does not deserve four or five stars. One can argue that had Kennedy lived, he would've been a good leader, but as my friend VirileVagabond says, what happened is what's important. We must judge history as it is, not as it may have been. To ignore Kennedy's policy flaws is a disgrace to the man himself, as he would want his place in history to be based on objectivity and true facts, not mythical bologna.

REVISED: To start off, let's remember that this is a list of 20th Century leaders. When it comes to JFK, his advocates and defenders are forced to speculate, often commenting about "what if Kennedy had lived." The problem with this should be self-evident. "What ifs" are pure guesswork; what matters is what happened. Addressing the popular love affair with JFK, Kennedy is primarily loved and given so many passes (much like Clinton) because he was the first president of his generation. Objectively, he was a largely failure. The Bay of Pigs was an embarrassment (whether the administration encouraged the action or not). Kennedy brought us closer to nuclear confrontation (ie the Cuban Missile Crisis) than at any other time in history, and this could have been avoided if the missiles in Turkey would have been negotiated away in secret. He took us deeper into Vietnam (though whether this was a poor decision in foresight is debatable). Even his moon challenge was designed to militarize space which was later eschewed via treaty. On the plus side, he did invigorate the younger generations to take an interest in politics, he lowered the draconian tax burden, and established the Peace Corps (though a domestic version should have been established as well). The bottom line is that JFK had some rather substantial failures, he didn't serve a complete term (though due to no fault of his own), his primary challenge should have been avoided, and his achievements seem to be tainted or incomplete. The bottom line is that one can possible argue that Kennedy could have been a great leader, but we will never know; therefore, his rating on this list must reflect this reality.

I like Kennedy as a visionary and challenger of the human spirit. He is rated too highly on this list, however. His influence as a leader is not on the same level as Truman, Gorbachev, and Reagan.

generally overrated but rosetothe occassion when had too.

almost as bad as bill clinton. nuff said.

The only reason he's getting more than one star is because he is the only Democrat I've ever heard who understood the concept that tax cuts are desirable and benefit ALL Americans. Other than that, he did too much posing for cameras and was nothing but style over substance. I too agree that America was almost brought to nuclear war after his botched policies in Cuba.

A womanizer who put a man on the moon.

The person who got the "US presidency as a gift".

The only man to go to the brink of nuclear war not once but twice (Berlin and Cuba.) over what he thought was a personal insult by Khrushchev who thought him an insignificant lightweight. Guess what? He was. Dangerous fool and Clinton model for failed Presidency. The entire Kennedy clan has a lot of pretence concealing very little substance.

ONE OF OUR BEST PRESIDENTS EVER! HIS POLICIES DURING THE COLD WAR WERE GREAT! HE RANKS UP THERE WITH BILL CLINTON AND ABE LINCOLN, NOT WITH IRRSPONSIBLE PRESIDENTS LIKE BOTH GEORGE BUSHS, RICHARD NIXON, AND RONALD REAGAN!

Read THE DARK SIDE OF LEADERSHIP for a good biography. He is the second worst President (after FDR before WJC). While his death was unfortunate, he would otherwise not be remembered.

He gets points for the Cuban Missle Crisis- but those points are quickly thrown out b/c of the Bay of Pigs. How on earth did this guy become a legend? A couple of nice speeches? Because he was shot? People who credit him with Civil Rights really make me laugh. Kennedy didn't help out the movement as much as guilt-ridden liberals want to think. . .it was the citizens who made Civil Rights happen. Kennedy didn't jump on the political bandwagon of Civil Rights until it served his values. He also had a less-than-sterling record on Vietnam. Why does the media continue to worship this guy?

Freciera222's comment is great because it shows exactly what any Kennedy support has to say, he was one of the best Presidents. No elaboration, no details, just an open statement with no evidence. I've yet to see a convincing argument for JFK. He was probably the most charasmatic Predsident we ever had, but I don't see how that overrides actual accomplishments. On the world stage he did virtually nothing except proclaim that he was a pastry. At home he made some really great speeches that made America sound tough, but didn't do much to back it up. The only really good action he took was helping start the Navy SEALS, which are still one of the top special forces units around. When you look at the achievements of all the leaders of the 20th century I just don't think you can rationally place JFK in the top 15 U.S. leaders certainly not the top 15 of the whole world.

One of the greatest presidents ever,

I like Kennedy okay but he has to be the most overrated president of all time. He is merely symbolic of certain high ideals. People always talk about how great he was but I seldom hear anyone specifically explain what he did that made him so great. I can't help but think that it's just because he was young, good looking and got shot.

JFK was a great president. He fought for the equal rights of minority groups. I wish we still had such a tolerant president.

One phrase: BAY OF PIGS. He was a weak president that should've removed Castro. If he had properly contained Catro, there would NOT have been a cuban missile crisis.

It's amazing what an assassination can do for a man's popularity. He wouldn't have even been elected for a second term. His approval rating was in the 20's when he was shot. The Kennedy's were involved in the death of Marilyn Monroe.

"Grossmith's" comment says it all. I wish I'd thought of that one. JFK was nothing more than a hypocritical, womanizing, liberal slimebag ala Bill Clinton. If he hadn't gotten popped in Dallas, he'd just be another washed-up 60's liberal like his bloated brother Teddy.

His assasination was tragic for his family and the country. But, in retrospect I now see him as basically an ambitious rich guy with ambitious roots whose family, and a rather odd collection of supporters, purchased the presidency for him. Once he was in, he suddenly became too good to associate with some of those "odd" people. So he simply brushed them off his expensive suit and assumed the psuedo-aristocratic persona that would suit the role. He was witty, charming, had an attractive wife and sweet children yet, he was apparently also a sex addicted playboy. If the media had been as intrusive in 1960 as it is today, there would have no doubt been a much bigger scandal than the one we were provided with in the Clinton legacy.

1 good speech and he's the best forever? Not in my book. Name something good he did...anyone...anyone? Missle crisis- don't think so. Bay of Pigs- don't think so. Vastly over rated.

Kennedy's presidency was overly romantized. His presidency had some good points. He realized that low taxes equals more growth for US industry. His foreign policy was a disaster. He did not have the guts to defend the Cubans who were taken prisoner by Castro during the Bay of Pigs. His brother Bobby Kennedy did a very effective job of averting nuclear war with Russia. He really did not believe in Civil Rights, the Kennedy family were known to be racists. The reality of the matter is that the Republican party passed the Civil rights legislation in 1964. Democrats like Kennedy were for Civil Rights only when it was politically expedient for them to be for it.

calculating charismatic source of "the question"

Bobbie had the brains, JFK had the looks. Ted had nothing.

Bay of pigs? Cuban missile crisis? Vietnam? all handled like the fool he was. And any civil rights advances made in his administration were hardly groundbreaking on his part.

A really tough leader to rate. His dad bought him the Presidency (partly through mob connections) and he blatantly cheated on his wife while in the White House. But JFK showed firm leadership during the Cuban Missle Crisis and he started the Peace Corp... This guy was all over the board.

Grossly overrated. A womanizing socialist. Hmmm...sure his name wasn't Bill?