I also share the opinion that Polk was the greatest achiever among the one-termers. After studying him for years I still did not arrive at wording what really makes me feel that there was some greatness about him, although he clearly was neither a hero, nor a genius, nor a saint.

I do not like how PC historians look down on him and how his most renowned biographer labeled him as a driven overachiever according to the psychological fashion of his time. I do also not like the admiration for Polk which I found among some people whom I find overly prone to hostility - ready to use force and guile to meet goals like Polk, but unwilling to undergo the toils and responsibilities of aiming and calibrating force and guile carefully.

Polk's favorite means of gaining influence was, by the way, persuasion. As for Mexico, he had to find that he had no chance of persuading her government into anything, because they had called her ambassador back and refused to receive the U. S. envoy.

A careful study of Polk reveals some inherent problems of Democracy. I got convinced of this while I read Polk's diary. One of them would be that a statesman will inevitably get impeded by a parliament if quick and vigorous moves can solve a problem by nipping trouble in the bud. In dealing with Mexico Polk faced this problem. Cannot help finding some greatness in his willingness to tackle it without sparing himself. Subsequently he got his full share of the effort and risk it all involved.

Nevertheless, I wouldn't say that Polk worked himself to death. His diary reveals that he experienced his deepest troubles when he could do nothing to make the parliament of the U. S. and Mexico ratify the peace treaty and had to wait idly. It was over when the treaty was safely concluded. From then on he recovered and on a picture taken near the end of his term he looks much older than his age, but quite well. In my opinion his death was rather caused by a tricky combination of accidentally unhealthy weather, yearning for appreciation, homesickness, unexpected construction measures in his house, and the prevalence of an epidemic disease - too much adversities at a time where the "retirement-shock" had to be overcome. I think it highly probable that he would have survived if only one of these factors had not existed.

You might find more of my opinions on Polk in the comment I made on the redoedo's review.

Without question, the most effective one-term president and one of the top ten presidents of all-time. He achieved all major intiatives he set when running for the presidency. He also made clear he would only serve one term.

Stole more land for the USA than any other President.

Effective in that he accomplished what he set out to do: acquisition of new lands (Fifty-Four Forty or Fight pledge), the settlement of the Texas border dispute, lower tariff rates and the establishment of a new federal depository system. Additionally, Polk left the presidency much stronger than he found it, and wisely kept his promise not to run for a second term. His impact on the nation cannot be denied, both postive and negative. While hell-bent on expanding the size of the United States, Polk was not mindful of the consequences of acquiring more US territory as it pertained to the expansion of slavery. Polk aggressively fought passage of the Wilmot Proviso, and missed opportunity after opportunity to reach a consensus on the issue. Indeed, Polk was the last president who could have effectively addressed the issue of slavery and potentially avoided the Civil War.

Alot of PC historians look down on this guy, but his record is very impressive. He accomplished everything he set out to do, and the aquistion of California is one of the major events in the development of the United States.