(1) Jefferson, because against his political nature, he made the decision to purchase the Louisiana Territory, despite his concerns that this was not in the power of the Presidency...and in doing so, changed the very nature of America.
(2) Lincoln, who faced perhaps the greatest crisis the United States has ever faced, took actions in 1861 while Congress was not in session that probably saved the Union after Ft. Sumter, and managed to successfully negotiate a Cabinet that had at least three members (maybe more) that thought they were more qualified to be President than he was (Seward, Chase, Stanton--any others BPSCG?)
(3) Washington, more for what he didn't do, which was to play partisan politics (he made good use of both Hamiton and Jefferson), overstate the power of the Presidency, and leave after two terms, thus allowing the peaceful transfer of power when many would have been happy to have him President in perpetuity.
(4) TR Roosevelt, for being one of the few Presidents who were both patrician (he came from a very well-to-do family) and yet had worked with his hands and knew the feeling of being personally shot at. Establishing conservation ideals and busting trusts, that "damn Cowboy" ran against the grain and was perhaps the first president elected on his popularity rather than his political connections.
(5) FDR, not because of anything in particular he did, but, to quote an old Jimmy Breslin line about Churchill, "He was there when he was needed". We can argue about Social Security and the NRA (not the gun folks) and Court-packing and any number of things over the 13 years, but looking back it's hard to concieve of anybody else in the role. Willkie? Dewey? Al Smith? All able men, no doubt, but could they have led the nation with the confidence and optomism of Roosevelt?
Note, I purposely did not tag anybody from the past 40 years, since there is simply too little time for historical perspective on them.
(although i will later in the thread).
.
