[BW2221]

I can't understand why they consider Buchanan a failure. He was President during the war against Mexico and we gained a lot of geography (maybe that's not considered a good thing any more).

While I disagree that Bush is one of the worst ever, I would rate him much lower than I would have two years ago. If he makes enough dealer with Dirty Harry and Ms. Nancy, it's possible he could drop into the lower tier in my ranking system (but probably would be better regarded by historians).

[teacherwoes]

I can't understand why they consider Buchanan a failure. He was President during the war against Mexico

Buchanan wasn't the President during the Mexican War...it was Polk. Buchanan, on the other hand did help quiet things down in the San Juan Islands (WA) dispute of 1859 (also called the Pig War). Because of Buchanan we didn't go to war with the British over ownership of the Islands and that's a good thing to be remembered by.

[COEXERJ145]

I can't understand why they consider Buchanan a failure. He was President during the war against Mexico and we gained a lot of geography (maybe that's not considered a good thing any more).

That would be James K Polk who was President during the Mexican-American War. Buchanan preceded Lincoln.

[kjo]

No. Polk fought the Mexican War. Buchanan was President just before the Civil War; did little except try and ram the Lecompton (Kansas Constitution) down the throats of the North.

It didn't work.

[WinOne4TheGipper]

The Mexican-American War happened 1846-1848, within James K. Polk's administartion. Buchanan is a failure because of his mismanagement of the secession situation during the lame duck period of his presidency (you also know that you're pretty bad when your own party won't renominate you).

[L.N. Smithee]

I can't understand why they consider Buchanan a failure. He was President during the war against Mexico and we gained a lot of geography (maybe that's not considered a good thing any more).

From Foner Foney's editorial:

---

One other president bears comparison to Bush: James K. Polk. Some historians admire him, in part because he made their job easier by keeping a detailed diary during his administration, which spanned the years of the Mexican-American War. But Polk should be remembered primarily for launching that unprovoked attack on Mexico and seizing one-third of its territory for the United States.

---

Foner acts as if this was a terribly egregious action (not to say that I endorse it, it's just that it's history, and will not change) but fails to note that despite any disdain for "unprovoked" warfare the United States' international reputation was not damaged enough to prevent it from becoming an even more pervasive world power.