Jesus, Finn, William Henry Harrison fell ill from being outside in bad weather at his inauguration, and died a month later. So you rate him a "little know figure whose imcompetence was swallowed up by history and overcome by American vitality?" You're a nut bag, Bubba. U. S. Grant and Herbert Hoover both showed themselves to be pre-eminently competent in other fields at other times. There's absolutely no reason to assume that John Tyler was incompetent, and given that he succeeded the ill-fated Harrison in an office which no one suspected he would be called upon to fill, i'd say he did a good job in a difficult time. The attempt to impeach him failed miserably. His support of the admission of Texas to the union was popular with most Southerners, was resented by some Northerners, and unimportant to the remainder of the country. I'd be interested to know why you consider Fillmore or Andrew Johnson to have been incompetent, and how, to use your silly phrase, "American vitality" rescued the situation.
No . . . wait . . . i don't have any interest in this bullshit you're peddling.
I suspect that you have just pulled some names out the hat, and added to them a list of "liberal" Presidents whom you despise for partisan, ideological reasons. Even if we were to admit most of you original list, and striking Grant, Harrison, and Taylor, all of whom had successful military careers which were appreciated by the nation at the time of their service, quite apart from their respective terms in office as President, you still haven't made much of a case.
You also make your silly claims look the more quixotic by comparing Carter unfavorably to Lyndon Johnson and Wilson, but then throwing them into this list, as well. Frankly, i think you're just bullshitting here because you called on a typically stupid remark you had made. I see no evidence that much thought goes into what you write.