vcczar Posted January 2, 2022 Share Posted January 2, 2022 I created an algorithm for Most Impactful VPs in History. This was kind of easy because ideology doesn't play a role at all. George HW Bush did just about everything one would want in a VP -- he served for 8 years, helped his ticket win his state twice, was relatively active, stepped in when Reagan had surgery, immediately followed his two-term president to become president in his own right. His score would have been higher had he broke more tie-breaking votes and completely avoided scandal. I had expected Nixon to win, but he came in 3rd. John Adams was the first VP. John C Calhoun had the most tie-breaking votes. Overall, recent VPs have an advantage because they tend to be active while pre-Nixon VPs are not. Harris could rise way up or plummet. She hasn't been around enough to really lose any points, but she's racking up tie-breaking votes at a rapid pace. Those alone could possibly get her to #2 on this list, the rate she's going. She's gets some "impactful points" for being both the first women VP and VP of color. So she's boosted by two things that don't correspond with ability. Wallace, Burr, and Rockefeller all have negative scores. All three were dropped from the ticket on a reelection bid, all three failed to avoid scandal, all three failed to win their home state for their president, and Rockefeller never cast a tie-breaking vote. In Burr's defense, he was a VP prior to the 12th Amendment, so he isn't on a ticket. Rockefeller's only positive quality as VP was that while he didn't avoid all scandal, he didn't contribute to a major scandal while as VP. VP Score George HW Bush 57 John Adams 54 Richard Nixon 53 George Clinton 51 John C Calhoun 51 Dick Cheney 48 Al Gore 44 Daniel D Tompkins 41 Joe Biden 40 Kamala Harris 40 Thomas R Marshall 39 Lyndon B Johnson 35 George M Dallas 34 Millard Fillmore 33 Chester A Arthur 33 Harry S Truman 31 Andrew Johnson 30 Theodore Roosevelt 30 Calvin Coolidge 30 Martin Van Buren 29 John Nance Garner 28 Mike Pence 28 Walter Mondale 26 John Tyler 25 John C Breckinridge 25 Charles Curtis 23 Alben W Barkley 23 Gerald Ford 20 Hubert Humphrey 19 Schuyler Colfax 18 William Rufus King 17 Hannibal Hamlin 17 Adlai Stevenson I 17 James S Sherman 16 Charles W Fairbanks 15 Levi P Morton 14 Garret Hobart 13 Thomas A Hendricks 12 Charles G Dawes 12 Spiro T Agnew 12 Elbridge Gerry 11 William A Wheeler 11 Dan Quayle 10 Thomas Jefferson 8 Richard Mentor Johnson 4 Henry Wilson 3 Henry A Wallace -1 Aaron Burr -2 Nelson Rockefeller -5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConservativeElector2 Posted January 2, 2022 Share Posted January 2, 2022 50 minutes ago, vcczar said: George HW Bush [...] His score would have been higher had he broke more tie-breaking votes and completely avoided scandal. He had received an ultimate score if he had been re-elected together with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted January 2, 2022 Author Share Posted January 2, 2022 3 minutes ago, Patine said: And possibly was the only U.S. VP who tried to have the President he served under assassinated. I don't pretend to know this for sure (that would make me a conspiracy theorist), but there is some definite evidence, including the relationship of the attempted assassin's father to Bush, the acrimony behind the 1980 Republican Nomination Primary (not nearly as bad as the 2008, 2012, or 2016 ones, by far, but Bush was apparently bitter about accepting his consolation prize), the haste and swiftness, and almost coldness, he was recorded as, "assuming the Presidency," (not the ACTING Presidency)," from Air Force Two upon learning of the event, and his background as the former leader of a massive organization of spies, saboteurs, political destabilizers, assassins, and terrorists. But, again, I, myself, know nothing FOR CERTAIN. I've heard nothing to justify this. Sounds like a general bottom-barrel conspiracy theory. I think the "assuming the Presidency" part probably had more to do with the fact that our presidents tend to die when they get shot, and at 69 or 70 years old, Reagan seemed at the age where death was likely. I don't think any VP has been involved in an assassination attempt, not even LBJ. I think Bush is at least patriotic enough to consider killing a president to be traitorous. I think LBJ might think the same. Neither Bush nor LBJ were compelled to kill a president. Bush was still "young," and could expect to be a frontrunner in 1984 or 1988. Meanwhile, JFK was so popular that LBJ would likely have been a frontrunner in 1968, especially since RFK might not have run for US Senator if his brother had lived and, therefore, wouldn't be a candidate in 1968. I think Burr, Cheney, and Nixon are the only other VPs that could potentially kill to become president, but Cheney possibly was happy with his influence. Nixon was so young that he didn't have to knock off Eisenhower, as he probably thought the presidency was his in 1960. Burr was also young. Cheney was the only one with a closing window and no real chance at ever being a frontrunner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted January 2, 2022 Author Share Posted January 2, 2022 35 minutes ago, ConservativeElector2 said: He had received an ultimate score if he had been re-elected together with that. We've never had a two-term president followed by a two-termer who had been the VP. The closest we get is this chain, even though it includes two parties: Adams was Washington's 2-term VP; Jefferson was Adams's VP; Madison was Jefferson's 2-term Sec of State; Monroe was Madison's Sec of State for almost the entire 2-terms; JQ Adams was Monroe's 2-term Sec of State. In fact, we've only had back-to-back two-terms a few times: Jefferson-Madison-Monroe (3 two-terms) Lincoln/Johnson-Grant (2 two-terms) [if that one counts] FDR-FDR-FDR-FDR/Truman (2 two-terms) [If that one counts] Clinton-Bush-Obama [3 two terms, but different parties] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pringles Posted January 2, 2022 Share Posted January 2, 2022 39 minutes ago, Patine said: And possibly was the only U.S. VP who tried to have the President he served under assassinated. I don't pretend to know this for sure (that would make me a conspiracy theorist), but there is some definite evidence, including the relationship of the attempted assassin's father to Bush, the acrimony behind the 1980 Republican Nomination Primary (not nearly as bad as the 2008, 2012, or 2016 ones, by far, but Bush was apparently bitter about accepting his consolation prize), the haste and swiftness, and almost coldness, he was recorded as, "assuming the Presidency," (not the ACTING Presidency)," from Air Force Two upon learning of the event, and his background as the former leader of a massive organization of spies, saboteurs, political destabilizers, assassins, and terrorists. But, again, I, myself, know nothing FOR CERTAIN. Of all things you've said I never thought I'd see the day this is said... disgraceful insanity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vcczar Posted January 2, 2022 Author Share Posted January 2, 2022 39 minutes ago, Patine said: You seem to think I made this up out of my imagination. I didn't. I also I didn't I didn't know for sure. It seems that indicting leaders of power of high and despicable you DON'T like or approve of is all par for the course, and even material for, "jock talk," and some low-brow humour. But making similar indictments of leaders of power you DO like or approve of, even admire, gets posts like the one I'm quoting. The fact is, high crime, breach of the trust, abuse of power, and even despicable and underhanded dirty pool by such leaders is NOT determined in likelihood of possibility or not by your personal opinions on them, or respect or admiration for them. That is a narcissistic and egotistic viewpoint you have to grow and mature beyond. You turn every thread into a fight. Stop it. I know you are provoked by every one, but you need to stop reacting to what everyone says. You're probably the oldest person on this forum. Show some wisdom and set an example. You're acting like Donald Trump when you react to everything. The minions that provoke you will stop when you don't give them what they want -- your reaction. You are entertainment to them. You fall into their traps every...single....time. Do your part to stop turning my threads into fights. It makes me not want to post any more or make polls. If you must react, send them a private message. No one else wants to see it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitten Posted January 2, 2022 Share Posted January 2, 2022 7 hours ago, vcczar said: I created an algorithm for Most Impactful VPs in History. This was kind of easy because ideology doesn't play a role at all. George HW Bush did just about everything one would want in a VP -- he served for 8 years, helped his ticket win his state twice, was relatively active, stepped in when Reagan had surgery, immediately followed his two-term president to become president in his own right. His score would have been higher had he broke more tie-breaking votes and completely avoided scandal. I had expected Nixon to win, but he came in 3rd. John Adams was the first VP. John C Calhoun had the most tie-breaking votes. Overall, recent VPs have an advantage because they tend to be active while pre-Nixon VPs are not. Harris could rise way up or plummet. She hasn't been around enough to really lose any points, but she's racking up tie-breaking votes at a rapid pace. Those alone could possibly get her to #2 on this list, the rate she's going. She's gets some "impactful points" for being both the first women VP and VP of color. So she's boosted by two things that don't correspond with ability. Wallace, Burr, and Rockefeller all have negative scores. All three were dropped from the ticket on a reelection bid, all three failed to avoid scandal, all three failed to win their home state for their president, and Rockefeller never cast a tie-breaking vote. In Burr's defense, he was a VP prior to the 12th Amendment, so he isn't on a ticket. Rockefeller's only positive quality as VP was that while he didn't avoid all scandal, he didn't contribute to a major scandal while as VP. VP Score George HW Bush 57 John Adams 54 Richard Nixon 53 George Clinton 51 John C Calhoun 51 Dick Cheney 48 Al Gore 44 Daniel D Tompkins 41 Joe Biden 40 Kamala Harris 40 Thomas R Marshall 39 Lyndon B Johnson 35 George M Dallas 34 Millard Fillmore 33 Chester A Arthur 33 Harry S Truman 31 Andrew Johnson 30 Theodore Roosevelt 30 Calvin Coolidge 30 Martin Van Buren 29 John Nance Garner 28 Mike Pence 28 Walter Mondale 26 John Tyler 25 John C Breckinridge 25 Charles Curtis 23 Alben W Barkley 23 Gerald Ford 20 Hubert Humphrey 19 Schuyler Colfax 18 William Rufus King 17 Hannibal Hamlin 17 Adlai Stevenson I 17 James S Sherman 16 Charles W Fairbanks 15 Levi P Morton 14 Garret Hobart 13 Thomas A Hendricks 12 Charles G Dawes 12 Spiro T Agnew 12 Elbridge Gerry 11 William A Wheeler 11 Dan Quayle 10 Thomas Jefferson 8 Richard Mentor Johnson 4 Henry Wilson 3 Henry A Wallace -1 Aaron Burr -2 Nelson Rockefeller -5 So cool to see H.W on top! He ain't no whimp after all! 😄 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timur Posted January 3, 2022 Share Posted January 3, 2022 21 hours ago, vcczar said: I created an algorithm for Most Impactful VPs in History. This was kind of easy because ideology doesn't play a role at all. George HW Bush did just about everything one would want in a VP -- he served for 8 years, helped his ticket win his state twice, was relatively active, stepped in when Reagan had surgery, immediately followed his two-term president to become president in his own right. His score would have been higher had he broke more tie-breaking votes and completely avoided scandal. I had expected Nixon to win, but he came in 3rd. John Adams was the first VP. John C Calhoun had the most tie-breaking votes. Overall, recent VPs have an advantage because they tend to be active while pre-Nixon VPs are not. Harris could rise way up or plummet. She hasn't been around enough to really lose any points, but she's racking up tie-breaking votes at a rapid pace. Those alone could possibly get her to #2 on this list, the rate she's going. She's gets some "impactful points" for being both the first women VP and VP of color. So she's boosted by two things that don't correspond with ability. Wallace, Burr, and Rockefeller all have negative scores. All three were dropped from the ticket on a reelection bid, all three failed to avoid scandal, all three failed to win their home state for their president, and Rockefeller never cast a tie-breaking vote. In Burr's defense, he was a VP prior to the 12th Amendment, so he isn't on a ticket. Rockefeller's only positive quality as VP was that while he didn't avoid all scandal, he didn't contribute to a major scandal while as VP. VP Score George HW Bush 57 John Adams 54 Richard Nixon 53 George Clinton 51 John C Calhoun 51 Dick Cheney 48 Al Gore 44 Daniel D Tompkins 41 Joe Biden 40 Kamala Harris 40 Thomas R Marshall 39 Lyndon B Johnson 35 George M Dallas 34 Millard Fillmore 33 Chester A Arthur 33 Harry S Truman 31 Andrew Johnson 30 Theodore Roosevelt 30 Calvin Coolidge 30 Martin Van Buren 29 John Nance Garner 28 Mike Pence 28 Walter Mondale 26 John Tyler 25 John C Breckinridge 25 Charles Curtis 23 Alben W Barkley 23 Gerald Ford 20 Hubert Humphrey 19 Schuyler Colfax 18 William Rufus King 17 Hannibal Hamlin 17 Adlai Stevenson I 17 James S Sherman 16 Charles W Fairbanks 15 Levi P Morton 14 Garret Hobart 13 Thomas A Hendricks 12 Charles G Dawes 12 Spiro T Agnew 12 Elbridge Gerry 11 William A Wheeler 11 Dan Quayle 10 Thomas Jefferson 8 Richard Mentor Johnson 4 Henry Wilson 3 Henry A Wallace -1 Aaron Burr -2 Nelson Rockefeller -5 I subtracted 5 from 57 and averaged and got 26 which is Walter Mondale's score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.