The Treaty of Versailles, which ended the First World War and which Wilson played a key part in negotiating, was never ratified by the U.S. Congress and, as a result, the United States never became a member of the League of Nations. Wilson's behavior in reaction to opposition in Congress regarding the Versailles Treaty, in general, and the League of Nations portion of that Treaty, specifically, may be the best indication of the similarities between himself and President Grant. Both men had a strong stubborn streak that often interfered with their otherwise competent leadership skills. In Grant's case, his stubbornness was characterized by his misguided loyalty to his friends and military associates. Throughout his two administrations, Grant continued to surround himself with his friends and former military associates and place such individuals in positions of authority instead of utilizing the services of talented and experienced politicians. The result was that his relationship with Congress suffered and his administrations were fraught with numerous and, seemingly, endless scandals. Because he refused to listen to his political advisors, Grant's two terms of office are looked upon by most historical experts as being largely ineffective.

Wilson's stubbornness manifested itself throughout his tenure in office but until the end of his second term never was the source of any particular political detriment, however, his stance on the League of Nations tainted a Presidency that otherwise was considered successful. Through most of his eight years in office Wilson had effectively led the country and, despite being unsuccessful in keeping the country out of the First World War, was viewed favorably by the public. The battle of the ratification of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations, however, proved to be the political undoing of Wilson and, ultimately, it proved to be his physical undoing as well. Wilson worked as hard at attempting to convince the American public as to the merits of the League of Nations as he had in convincing the rest of the world of its merits but in his efforts to do so Wilson lost his political and physical viability. Worn down, Wilson suffered a severe stroke in October of 1919...

Grant, although a graduate of West Point, was never considered to be a particularly cerebral individual. Prone to drinking heavily, Grant was unkempt and vulgar in terms of his interactions with others. Wilson, on the other hand, was one of the nation's most educated Presidents and always the proper gentleman. Yet, both men were able to reach the nation's highest office and successfully complete two terms of office and lead their country through turbulent times.
History has been much kinder to Wilson than it has been to Grant. Although Wilson's administration ended on a sour note, his efforts at encouraging the country's participation in the League of Nations has earned him respect and the fact that the United States later led the drive for the formation of the United Nations serves as an endorsement of Wilson's position. Grant's reputation as a President, unfortunately, continues to suffer (Wilentz, 2010). Hindsight has done little to dispel how ineffective Grant was as a political leader. His ineffectiveness led to many of the subsequent problems that developed in the deep South and contributed to the effects of the Panic of 1873.

Strangely, both men left office under a cloud yet one has become to be viewed as one of the nation's best Presidents while the other is considered among its worst. Therein, both represent how precarious the winds of popularity are and how popularity so seldom represents effectiveness.