Alice makes the case for America’s unloved Presidents.

Making a Case for America’s Unloved Presidents

According to the Huffington Post, the 10 worst Presidents in American History are as follows:


10) Warren G. Harding (1921-3)

9) Calvin Coolidge (1923-9)

8) James Carter (1977-81)

7) Ronald Reagan (1981-9)

6) Herbert Hoover (1929-33) (top left)

5) James Buchanan (1857-61)

4) Richard Nixon (1969-74) (top right)

3) Andrew Jackson (1829-37)

2) George W. Bush (2001-9)

1) Donald Trump (2017-)


The reasons for such general hatred of these Presidents ranges from corruption to poor foreign policy. However, some of these evaluations of these Presidents is not wholly fair, nor a fair representation, inclusive of their other achievements. Therefore, I will attempt to make a case for these most hated US Presidents.


10) Starting with Warren G. Harding, ranked 10th, the one word summary given to Harding’s presidency was ‘corrupt’, owing to his extra-marital affairs (with 7 alleged mistresses), open flaunting of prohibition, treatment of strikers in the Great Railroad Strike of 1922, and involvement in the Teapot Dome Scandal involving bribery of the Secretary of the Interior, Albert B. Fall. In short, this was a huge mistake, and was not received well by the American people of the time. Robert Cherny named it the ‘greatest and most sensational scandal in the history of American politics before the Watergate Scandal’.


However, many argue that Harding was not directly involved in the Teapot Dome Scandal and that his decisions made relating to the Railroad Strike were his only true option. Although the Teapot Dome Scandal harmed the reputation of his presidency, he was unaware and uninvolved – his only mistake being the appointment of Albert B. Fall as Secretary of the Interior. Therefore, Harding can be excluded from blame.

It is true that his extra-marital affairs are hard to justify, but best-loved presidents such as Kennedy were known to have them too.


Although the President should have been setting an example for the rest of America with prohibition, when compared to the general alcohol consumption of the population, his drinking habits were entirely normal. George Cassidy estimated that in 1930, 80% of Senators and Congressmen drank, and the popularity of speakeasies and the affluence of alcohol smuggling evidence wider drinking.


The extreme violence of the Great Railroad strike including vandalism of strike-breaker’s homes, physical violence, blowing up rail tracks, kidnappings, and the shooting of at least one company guard in Wisconsin left Harding with no option but to shut it down – but believed that the role of the Federal government in the dispute should be one of an “honest broker” rather than as a violent authority figure. Harding proposed a settlement to the Railroad companies, but it was denied by the companies. It was Judge James H. Wilkerson who ultimately delivered the strike injunction which violated free speech & assembly rights by condemning strike activity.


He had many successes during his short presidency, supporting an Anti-Lynching law (which was not carried by Congress) and cutting government spending from $5,000mil in 1920 to $3,333mil by 1922. He also provided maternity centres for women through the Shepard-Towner Maternity Aid Act, and successfully negotiated through the Washington Naval conference of 1921-22 to limit naval powers and prevent future war.

As a President, Harding was generally admired for bringing America into the great prosperity of the 1920s, until scandal came to light after his death.


9) Calvin Coolidge has been personally condemned for his refusal to speak in public, gaining the nickname ‘Silent Cal’ due to his shy nature. Critics of his presidency place blame of the rise of organised crime on his stricter enforcement of prohibition, and criticise him for his failure to alleviate the agricultural depression. The unfair result of the Sacco and Vanzetti case is also pinned on Coolidge, despite mounting evidence of their innocence.


However, Coolidge’s presidency was overshadowed by depression, which followed from the death of his son in 1924. This gave him the nickname of ‘Silent Cal’, which he accepted, writing later that “The words of a President have an enormous weight, and ought not to be used indiscriminately.” Even so, this President met more people and made more speeches than any previous President – he clearly was not as reserved as perceived.

Coolidge’s firm moral character and incorruptible nature restored American confidence in the White House following the scandals of his predecessor (Harding).

His economic policies continued the prosperity of the 1920s, cutting income tax with the 1924 Revenue Act and lowering interest rates.

There is also a strong argument that organised crime was on the rise before the 18th Amendment of prohibition. The end of prohibition saw no relent in organised crime – gangsters simply moved on to other industries. Before prohibition, gambling was rife – prohibition simply established a new opportunity for profit. Coolidge also had no choice other than to further enforce prohibition to fight back against violence, which peaked with the Saint Valentine’s Day Massacre of 1929. Having so many flaunt the law and ignore prohibition made the government look bad, so Coolidge’s strong approach was necessary to restore the image of strong and incorruptible government.

Coolidge’s failures to help American farmers during the 1920s was not unusual when compared to treatment of farmers in all other years in America. The farmers’ poor situation was exaggerated by their relative prosperity during WW1, as historically, the farmers of America had never done well, and all Presidents had failed to address their problems.

The outcome of the complex case of Sacco and Vanzetti also cannot be solely blamed on Coolidge – the result was down to a general anti-immigrant feeling and the Red Scare of the 20s following the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.


Coolidge had many successes during his presidency, including lowering the National debt from $22.3 billion in 1923 to $16.9 billion in 1929, and significantly lowering taxes following high taxation during the war. He also took a stance on Civil Rights, refusing to hire any known KKK members, and gave government jobs to African Americans.

Overall, Coolidge’s economic policy caused great prosperity (if unstable) throughout the 1920s, which credits him as a successful President. He restored public faith in the White House, and took a moral stance on Civil Rights.


8) James (Jimmy) Carter is ranked 8th due to his failed economic policy – he is blamed for causing the Great Recession of the late 1970s. His mismanagement of foreign affairs, such as a hostage crisis in Iran was also a great mistake. He is blamed for the 1979 energy crisis, and America carries a generally unfavourable view of his energy policy overall.


America’s situation was largely to blame for the perceived failings during his presidency – a hostile post-Watergate press, general public dissatisfaction with the government and the foreign and domestic crises littered his presidency with challenge. The economy’s situation was dire, meaning it would have been difficult for the population to find any satisfaction with any Federal action. Regarding the Great Recession, there is much evidence to show that it was already well on its way before Carter came into office. Even though the situation worsened during his presidency, he was limited in what he could do to help. Congress’ decision to maintain high tax rates starved the private sector, causing the economy to come to a standstill. During his presidency, unemployment was at an average rate of 6.5%, lower than that of Reagan (7.5%) and Obama (8.0%), despite the 1980 recession bringing down the average. On job creation he was also very successful – creating 211,000jobs/month (average over presidency) – only Clinton did better out of Presidents of the last 40 years, with 237,000/month.

Carter’s handling of the Iran Hostage Crisis of 1979 is condemnable, but he must be praised for his refusal to negotiate with Iran with the sale of weapons. This was the tactic employed by George H.W. Bush and William Casey, and is evidence of Carter’s strong moral character that he did not give in to that pressure.

There is further evidence of Carter’s strong moral character with his refusal to plat the ‘Washington Game’ – he would not repay political favours, often missed phone calls, and verbally insulted politicians – meaning he struggled to pass legislation through Congress. This can be viewed as an honourable stance, attempting to overrule the scheming and underhand tactics of previous Presidents. By 1977, however, he had established a good working relationship with Congress, enabling him to act and progress with his initiatives.

Although many criticise Carter’s handling of the energy crisis, his establishment of the Department of Energy and his new policy, introducing new technology, conservation, and price control. He can be credited for his moral and forward thinking approach – his strong beliefs in conservation and environmental protection strengthen his reputation. His handling of the Federal emergency in Love Canal, Niagara Falls in 1978 also credits him – the evacuation of over 800 families after the discovery of toxic waste beneath the town showed swift and competent action.


Carter can be further credited for many successes during his presidency. Carter’s insistence on American leadership in the development of global human rights initiatives was largely responsible for the developments of the 1980s and 90s. He also established the Department of Education, coordinating education across the USA and enabling Federal assistance to be given to schools more easily. Carter also pardoned dodgers of the Vietnam draft, reducing previous tensions.

Overall, Carter coped well with the many issues that he faced during his presidency, had strong moral character, and took a forward thinking stance on energy and the environment, making him a likeable President.


7) It is unusual to have Ronald Reagan so high on a list of unfavourable Presidents, when generally, he is ranked highly by historians and the public. When he left office in 1989, he held an approval rate of 68%, matching that of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Bill Clinton. However, Reagan is disliked for his economic and military policy, corruption within his government (Iran-Contra affair) and his failure to help with the global HIV/AIDS crisis. Reagan’s excessive military spending placed the government in a huge deficit, weakening social security due to underfunding. His opposition to labour unions was also poorly received – beginning with the firing of 11,345 striking traffic controllers (PATCO) and destruction of their union in 1981, a ‘War on Labor’ characterised his presidency.


However, Reagan can be largely attributed to the ending of the Cold War. His firm treatment of the Soviet Union, including the support of rebels battling Marxists through the Reagan Doctrine in Nicaragua, Angola, and Afghanistan ended Soviet occupation in Afghanistan, hitting the USSR hard. The USSR’s collapse only 3 years after the end of his presidency evidences the effectiveness of his foreign policy.

He also ensured that America remained a military superpower by increasing defence spending by more than 40%. This strengthened America’s position against the Soviet Union, and is also a contributing factor to the collapse of the USSR in 1991. Although this caused underfunding in other aspects of government spending, it was critical for upholding national security, preventing Nuclear War, and destroying the threat of the USSR.

His handling of labour affairs was harsh, but showed to both the USSR and the people of America how tough he could be. In the dangerous times, which characterised his presidency, this was an important trait to have. Reagan’s actions prevented a national air-traffic disaster, and stopped future illegal strikes in the Federal government.

Reagan also positively impacted the economy – before his presidency, the sum of inflation and unemployment rates were 19.99%, but when he left office, it was 9.72%. ‘Reaganomics’ created 16 million new jobs and an economic boom lasting two decades. This is by far his greatest achievement, and is why so many approve of Reagan as a President.

Although Reagan’s first response to the global HIV/AIDS crisis is inexcusable, he can be credited for his later role in developing antiretroviral medication in the US – increasing the life expectancy of a person living with HIV by decades. During his administration, he started programmes such as the Ryan White CARE Act, connecting people to the care they needed. Although funding for this was delayed, and 20,849 Americans had already died, he did eventually take effective action. On the whole, however, it is difficult to redeem Reagan on this front.

Regarding the Iran-Contra affair, there is much dispute over the level of Reagan’s involvement. Regardless, despite the clear immorality of an arms-for-hostages-swap, the sale of weapons to Iran was not deemed a criminal offence. Whether he was involved or not, there is wide debate over its justifications and morality, but the actions within government (refusing to declassify documents which could have been used in evidence, destruction of large volumes of documents relating to the scandal) cast a shadow over Reagan’s presidency.


Reagan won the largest electoral college victory in US history, changed the course of the Cold War through his Reagan Doctrine, rebooted the economy through Reaganomics, and upheld labour laws, all making him a very successful President, overall.


6) Herbert Hoover is often burdened with the blame of causing the Great Depression of the 1930s, many seeing his lack of action following the 1929 Wall Street Crash as the initial push towards economic disaster. His unfair treatment of the Bonus Marchers in which he denied WW1 veterans their pensions after they requested it early, and burned down the Hooverville which they formed in Washington – which resulted in the death of 2 babies – was seen as unfair and reckless, and greatly diminished his already unsavoury reputation which was marred by the economic crisis.


The circumstances of Hoover’s presidency, however, were the main cause of his unpopularity. Tracing Hoover as the sole cause of the Great Depression would be unfair, as would blaming his lack of action as personal fault. Hoover’s staunch belief in rugged individualism and limited Federal intervention was beneficial in the earlier years of his presidency, where America’s economy continued to boom due to these Republican policies – which had prevailed throughout the 1920s. Therefore, Hoover can be seen as a victim of his own beliefs – encouraged by key influencers such as Andrew Mellon, who claimed that the crash would ‘purge the rottenness’ out of the economy.

Past depressions and recessions in the American economy had been known to turn themselves around with limited Federal intervention, such as the (brief) crash in 1921 – so how was Hoover to know that this one would not do the same?

Furthermore, the extent of what Hoover could do, and what he had control of was extremely limited. A Republican dominated Congress would not have accepted any extreme interventional bills; nor would it have been advised by those he was working with. Hoover was stuck between his changing opinions and a stagnant Congress. He eventually did overcome his beliefs, side-lining them to help those most in need. By the end of his presidency, his measures of reform can rival those of Roosevelt – spending $500 million on agencies such as the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, Home Loan Bank Act, and $300 million to an Emergency Relief Act.

Hoover is disliked for this ‘weak’ action, but even the height of Federal intervention in Roosevelt’s policy (widely seen as socialist) did not completely solve the crisis – unemployment was not curtailed until WW2.

Hoover was also successful in delivering his promises to help the farmers – in 1930 he introduced the Agricultural Marketing Act, Grain Stabilisation Corporation, and the Hawley-Smoot Tariff – evidence of his effectiveness on dealing with problems which he felt needed dealing with.

Prior to Federal actions, he did not completely abandon the economy, donating $25,000 per year for relief action.

Although his treatment of the Bonus Marchers was harsh, Hoover had to set an example to prevent widespread protest. The deaths and injuries resulting from his action were a tragic accident, and by no means intentional. Hoover made a mistake with his harsh treatment, but if he had given in to their demands, he may have had to do the same for thousands of others – using up a huge amount of Federal money, which could instead be used in employment or housing initiatives.


Hoover also advocated Native American rights – increasing the quality of schools, living conditions, and greater presence to the Government. The increased Federal budget for children’s programmes, an advocate for child protection. He also increased the amount of land in the National Parks System, and increased the welfare and rights of prisoners with $7 million invested into building a new prison. This led to Congress passing bills to increase rights of prisoners, such as preventing overcrowding. Hoover was the co-founder of UNICEF (post presidency), and was a key player in the building of the Hoover Dam for renewable energy.


Overall, there is always more that a President can do – even Roosevelt, seen as the saviour of the depression, had his critics. Following the crash, Hoover remained stuck in his Republican beliefs – which were encouraged and perpetuated by economists and the government of the time. Strength of his character and effectiveness of his presidency can be seen in that by the end of his presidency, he had pushed past his own beliefs and supporters to increase Federal intervention to alleviate some of the biggest problems in America of that time. His achievements outside of economics show him as a thoughtful, environmentally conscious President, advocating human rights.


5) James Buchanan has been branded a ‘lame duck’ President as he remained in power for over four months before elected Abraham Lincoln came into office. He also supported the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision – which determined that slaves were not citizens of the United States. Not only this, but the break out of the Civil War is largely attributed to him – during these 4 months of power, 7 southern states left the US, and Buchanan’s lack of action gave them time to prepare for the Civil War, which ultimately resulted in over 600,000 deaths.


There is an argument against Buchanan as the sole cause of the Civil War – regardless of any actions that he could have taken, the tensions between the North and South were far too high for a war to be ended by any government action.

Throughout his presidency, Buchanan also worked hard to maintain peace between the pro-slavery and anti-slavery factions in government. Although he was notoriously pro-slavery, his strength of dealing with opposition credits him as a strong and firm leader.

Buchanan’s political strength can be seen with the passing of the Lecompton Constitution of Kansas – a pro-slavery bill – through a Congress dominated by anti-slavery Republicans. Buchanan achieved goals such as this set out at the beginning of his presidency, which makes him a successful (if backward and immoral) President.


However, these are the only possible ways to put a positive spin on Buchanan, who was pro-slavery, racist, and a major factor in the cause of the American Civil War. Even though he was politically able, he did not use these skills effectively to prevent the deaths of over 600,000 Americans.


4) Ranked Number 4, it is easy to understand the reasons for such negative views of Richard Nixon. The Watergate Scandal of 1974 was the most significant act of political corruption in American history, leading to a potential impeachment that only two other Presidents have reached. Watergate involved an illegal break in to the Democratic Party’s headquarters (at Watergate hotel, Washington D.C.) by his campaign committee. Nixon’s actions following the arrest of the perpetrators – impeding the enquiry, hiding evidence and firing investigators – only worsened the situation and highlighted his guilt. Nixon’s resignation in 1974 is evidence of how severe scandal was. Nixon also promised an end the Vietnam War, which he achieved in his second term following an escalation of involvement.


It is impossible to defend Nixon’s criminal actions, but in the earlier stages of his presidency he was not completely awful.

Regarding the Vietnam and Cold war, Nixon did make some positive impacts. He ended the draft in 1973, making the military a voluntary force. He also attempted to diplomatically reduce Cold War tensions with the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks in 1972 and signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, curtailing the threat of nuclear weapons. The end of the Vietnam war can also be attributed to Nixon with the signing of the Paris Peace Accords in 1973, and had avoided a second Cuban Missile Crisis in 1970 involving a Soviet Submarine base.

Although Nixon’s involvement in the Watergate Scandal is inexcusable, the media played a greater role in demonising his presidency than the scandal itself. Previous scandals (although not so bad) had not caused quite so much damage to the reputation of a President as this – the ruthlessness of the media, which still carries the same negative opinion of Nixon today, overshadows his presidency and writes him off as a poor President.


Aside from the Watergate Scandal, Nixon was generally regarded as a good President. Nixon desegregated southern schools, enforced civil rights for women by preventing gender bias in college sports with the signing of Title IX in 1972, succeeded in 2500 convictions against organised crime, created a temporary boom in the economy, and gave Native Americans the right of self-determination, ending the policy of forced assimilation into American society.

These successes are even more impressive when viewed within the context surrounding his presidency – Nixon was the first President since 1849 to face a Congress controlled by the opposition, which made passing bills near impossible. The poor economic conditions due to overspending in Vietnam, as well as social divisions created by America’s involvement in Vietnam made running the country a challenge.


Overlooking Watergate, therefore, Nixon was not a complete failure and coped well with the problems and difficulties in America at the time, advocating civil rights and ended the Vietnam War.


3) Andrew Jackson’s personal life greatly interfered with his reputation – as a gambler, slave owner and racist. He supported the extension of slavery to the Western territories, and presided over the Indian Removal Treaties, causing thousands of Native Americans to die in the process of relocation from their native lands to reservations east of the Mississippi.


Andrew Jackson’s treatment of Native Americans cannot be defended – 4,000 alone died on the Trail of Tears in 1838. Nor can his pro-slavery views be tolerated, even if they were in line with those of the time.

He can, however, be credited as a President for major achievements during his tenure. Jacksonian democracy characterised his presidency, giving more power to the voters and reinforcing the voting rights of the ‘common man’. This new political philosophy demanded elected, rather than appointed judges, and strengthened the role of the President over Congress.

Further government reform was seen with his effective handling of the Nullification Movement. South Carolina voted to ignore the tariff of 1828, making it ineffectual within its state borders. Jackson sent military forces to the border to enforce the Federal law, strengthening the Federal government’s role over state governments, and reinforcing the hierarchy which remains in America’s political structure today.

Jackson also presided over economic reform which would continue throughout the 20th century. Jackson recognised the dangerous power that the Second Bank of the United States wielded over the economy, stating that it caused the ‘advancement of few at the expense of many’, fearing that it could abuse its power, or cause financial panic as in 1819. Despite backlash from Congress, Jackson shut it down, an outcome echoed in bank reformation policy following the 1929 Wall Street Crash – bringing stability back to the economy.


Although Jackson cannot be forgiven for his pro-slavery stance and abominable treatment of Native Americans, he was responsible for large scale positive reform in the structure of the USA’s government system, and started to limit the role of unstable banks in the economy.


2) George W. Bush is often criticised for his reaction to 9/11 and scrutinised for beginning the War on Terror (Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003) with no real exit strategy to build peace. His economic policies were also poorly received, and limited action following Hurricane Katrina in 2005 characterised him as uncaring and thoughtless.


Bush is highly criticised by his delayed response to Katrina and the short-falls of Federal aid, but Bush’s presidency spanned over the years where 5 of the costliest US Atlantic Hurricanes. Katrina ($108bil), Wilma ($21bil), Ivan ($18.8bil), Charley ($15.1bil) and Rita ($12billion) cost the United States government over $84.7 billion in Federal aid during the Bush administration. The amount given towards the recovery of Katrina, therefore, is in proportion to other relief of past hurricanes during his presidency. The succession of costly natural disasters during his presidency put pressure on the Federal aid budget, crediting Bush for squeezing out over $60 billion for Hurricane Katrina.


FEDERAL AID (relief, approx.)

Katrina: $60.1 billion (2005)

Ivan: $7 billion (2004)

Wilma: $6.4 billion (2005)

Charley: $2.2 billion (2004)

Rita: $9 billion (2005)


9/11 and its causes cannot be blamed on Bush, despite numerous conspiracy theories and condemnation of his actions preceding and following the attack. 9/11 was the first attack on American soil since Pearl Harbour, so even if Bush had received intelligence before it occurred, he cannot be blamed for not taking the threat entirely seriously. Nevertheless, his commencement of the War on Terror has resulted in thousands of American military deaths, despite having some successes in stabilising the Middle East with the removal of Sadaam Hussein from power in 2003, after commencing war just a year earlier. 9/11 was an unprecedented event, which would have challenged any leader and inspired scrutiny, but Bush’s popularity, gaining him a second term, is evidence of his firm and decisive approach, which was admired by American voters. Following 9/11, there were no successful terrorist attacks on US homeland, which shows his effectiveness as President.

Although there are some problems with Bush’s economic policy, America’s continued recession cannot entirely be blamed on this. 9/11 and the ongoing war on terror hindered economic recovery, and 5 major hurricanes cost billions of Federal funds in relief. The 2008 economic crisis was prevented from turning into another Great Depression with Bush’s rapid response – encouraging Congress to allow a ‘Wall Street Bailout’ to lessen the blow of the crash. This financial downturn also prevented Bush from making any significant improvement to the economy of America – and all of these were factors completely out of his control.


Bush’s presidency did have many successes, however. Medicare Part D was passed, which was highly regarded by Americans for its Federal support of healthcare for all. Bush also established PEPFAR in 2003 – an emergency plan for AIDS relief, which received $15billion in funding over its first 5 years, and was renewed in 2008 due to its successes. A study in 2009 from Stanford University stated that the programme saved over 1million lives in Africa, and reduced rates of HIV/AIDS by 10% in countries where it was implemented. This was by far Bush’s greatest achievement during his presidency.


Although Bush is criticised for his handling of 9/11, the War on Terror, Hurricane Katrina and the poor economy of the 2000s, all these events were generally outside of his control. He did what he could as President, and was largely successful in completing the aims of the Iraq War. His achievements in healthcare, global and domestic, were also great successes of his presidency. Overall, it was the succession of national and global tragedies which overshadowed Bush’s presidency that caused such general hatred of him as a President, as his handling of them was not as awful as seen at surface level.


1)The controversy surrounding Donald Trump, as well as the fact that currently we are less than a quarter of the way through his presidency, makes arguing for his success as a President difficult. But so far, the amount of protest, threats of impeachment, and ridicule in all forms of the media show him as a less than universally adored President. With such high levels of dissatisfaction, how did he even become President?


During Obama’s presidency, a policy of ‘apology’ was enforced to a degree – the renewing of diplomatic relations with Cuba following a historical lack of contact was in many ways the reason for the popularity of Trump’s slogan ‘Make America Great Again’, which is supposed to be characterising his presidency. After apologies for past crimes and mistakes of America by Obama, many Americans desired a return to the power and influence of America seen before – an unapologetically strong country. The people of America wanted a return to the outward ‘greatness’ of America which can be seen at many other points in history. Obviously, the other reasons for his election cannot be ignored, his Republican policies promising to restore America to prosperity – popular in an America in many ways still struggling from the financial crisis of 2008. In a focus group of 800 voters, 42% said that Democratic economic policies would favour the wealthy, but only 21% said the same of the Republicans. (Washington Post) There was a wide belief that the Democratic Party stood for ‘the one percent’ or simply for the growth and success within their own party – a selfish reason for election. People voted for Trump hoping that he would help to make their America Great Again.

Many Trump voters also claimed to be voting to make sure Hillary Clinton would not take power. After news Russian involvement in her campaign emerged, Clinton lost support, many switching to back Trump. 2million more voters, however, still voted for Hillary – so the American electoral system can be regarded, overall, as the cause of Trump’s Presidential election.


From current media coverage, it is often difficult to believe that Trump really has been elected as the President of the United States of America, but his marketing strategies, Republican economic policy, and the manner of the electoral system all contributed to this result. I hope that upon the ending of Trump’s presidency, another blog post entitled ‘Redeeming the Worst Global Leaders of All Time’ emerges, pitting him against some of the truly criminal world leaders. There may be significantly fewer words than the 5000 or so used in this debate – after all, is there anything redeemable about Trump’s presidency so far?


Alice Wibberley, Year 13.