Take another quiz >

U.S. Presidents to Win the Nobel Peace Prize

Four American presidents have won a Nobel Peace Prize. Can you name them?
They were not necessarily current presidents at the time of the award
Quiz by Quizmaster
Rate:
First submittedNovember 26, 2018
Last updatedNovember 26, 2018
Times taken7,423
Rating4.19
0:45
Enter answer here
0
 / 4 guessed
The quiz is paused. You have remaining.
Scoring
You scored / = %
This beats or equals % of test takers also scored 100%
The average score is
Your high score is
Your best time is remaining
Keep scrolling down for answers and more stats ...
Year awarded
President
2009
Barack Obama
2002
Jimmy Carter
1919
Woodrow Wilson
1906
Theodore Roosevelt
+3
level 79
Nov 26, 2018
In the list of quizzes, this one shows it as asking for presidents who have won the "Noble Peace Prize." I believe a spelling correction might be in order.
+1
level 72
Nov 26, 2018
Yep
+4
level ∞
Nov 26, 2018
Lol. Fixed. Someone should start a "Noble" Peace Prize.
+3
level 71
Nov 27, 2018
I *highly* recommend checking out the Ignoble Prizes though!!!
+1
level 76
Nov 27, 2018
easy
+15
level 63
Nov 27, 2018
As much I liked the guy, Obama's prize was basically the He's-Not-George-Bush award. Giving a peace prize to the acting commander two Asian ground wars is a bit of a departure from what I would consider meeting the essential requirements of the award.
+4
level 60
Nov 27, 2018
Pretty much none of these guys really deserved it to be honest. Maybe Roosevelt.
+10
level 70
Nov 30, 2018
Tend to agree. Not certain about TR. Carter - probably though. Not only an actual 'good guy' but the Egypt/Israel peace deal was not only a big deal then but it lasted. PS when I say 'good guy' I don't mean 'good president'. He had too many domestic policy failures for that.
+2
level 63
Dec 21, 2018
What about Wilson? I was surprised that he was the least guessed, too.
+2
level 57
Dec 22, 2018
Well, I don't think Wilson should have won the award since he did enact many Jim Crow laws so... Yeah, it seems Teddy is the only one on their who earned it
+1
level 76
Dec 21, 2018
But he really nailed the whole not being Bush thing.
+5
level 30
Dec 24, 2018
The only problem is Bush and Obama are more alike than you believe. Both globalist shills, corporate loving authoritarians and warmongers. Obama was the biggest war spender of all time, with a budget of over 700 million. He waged war in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, and Yemen. He waged proxy wars and drone strikes, destabilized Libya and Egypt. Whaaaat a peacemaker!
+2
level 76
Dec 28, 2018
Mostly inaccurate oversimplification. But all presidents have to try and work within the system. Unless they're simply too stupid to figure out how like the current one.
+1
level 77
Nov 27, 2018
with US president quizzes, if in doubt guess washington, lincoln or roosevelt
+1
level 62
Nov 29, 2018
True.
+5
level 70
Dec 19, 2018
And only get one right in this quiz. Although I think most people remember that Obama received this prize if for no other reason than it made the prize irrelevant.
+1
level 63
Dec 21, 2018
Obama actually fit the criteria for receiving the peace prize better than many other recipients that most people would deem more "worthy". From the text of Nobel's will: "the person who has done the most or best to advance fellowship among nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and the establishment and promotion of peace congresses". When Obama was elected he started a reasonable dialogue with countries such as Iran, rather than warmongering dialogue.
+2
level 61
Dec 21, 2018
And in response to that, terrorist organizations began to grow because of our reduced presence in the middle east. So, while he may have met the criteria, it came at a cost. The president has a duty to protect the United States from its enemies, which Obama neglected for political reasons. His responsibilities never included obtaining accolades. He simply followed through with a campaign promise whether it was good for the country or not.
+3
level 79
Dec 21, 2018
With Nobel Peace Prize quizzes, maybe don't guess Washington or Lincoln, since the prize was first awarded in 1901.
+5
level 61
Dec 21, 2018
There seems to be a strong correlation between winning a Nobel Prize and being a terrible president...
+1
level 46
Dec 21, 2018
Care to elaborate?
+2
level 31
Apr 17, 2019
Obama and Saudi Arabia started a genocide in Yemen that Trump continued. Obama was the first president to have a full presidency of war. He got the award before he did these things but Obama should not have gotten it
+3
level 79
Apr 20, 2019
“Obama was the first president to have a full presidency of war.”

I don’t even know where to begin with that one...
+22
level 80
Dec 21, 2018
If that was the case, then Trump would already have two.
+3
level 68
Dec 21, 2018
I wish I could like this comment twice.
+2
level 30
Dec 24, 2018
Meanwhile, Trump is bringing the troops home from Syria and making definite plans to get us out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Trump is putting an end to this war bs. "It is not our job to replace regimes around the world."
+3
level 72
Dec 21, 2018
This comment prompted me to look up a variety of presidential rankings. Jimmy tends to be ranked last of this group, in the 26-33 range, which could be considered terrible, but definitely not the other three. Seems he got the award mainly for the work he continued to do after his presidency, though the Egypt Israel peace deal was a factor.
+1
level 45
Apr 17, 2019
He also signed the Panama Canal Treaty with Omar Torrijos, an under appreciated accomplishment that defused a major source of tension between the US and Latin America
+3
level 61
Dec 21, 2018
The top priorities of the POTUS should always be those that benefit the United States of America. If a president can obtain peace while at the same time adequately protecting the US from its enemies, then I consider it a success. But, we have never had a president that can do both. Peace is a wonderful idea, but it will never be obtainable globally. Instead, we have to do what is necessary to protect the nation. If that means going to war, then sobeit. If it means tightening up border security, then sobeit. If it means enforcing laws that already exist, then sobeit. I could care less if a president wins that prize. It isn't a measure of success as the president of the United States of America.
+1
level 60
Dec 23, 2018
These presidents (except Carter) did that. But because they were good, moral men (a big part of the reason they won the prize), they enforced the laws without stomping their feet and inciting hatred toward other groups. Look at how many illegal immigrants were deported under Obama. It was a lot, and he prioritized deporting people with criminal records. The difference is that Obama is compassionate enough and smart enough to know that you can deport them without getting on television and railing about how terrible immigrants are, because that is likely to stir up bigotry and xenophobia (but of course this is just a guess. No president would actually behave so irresponsibly...). Smart people understand that protecting the US and exercising great leadership are the results of sound and thoughtful policies, not grandstanding and pandering to the lowest common denominator with trite and simplistic notions about "America First." And that is why these men are esteemed.
+1
level 55
Dec 21, 2018
Just out of curiosity does anyone know why H.W. Bush didn't get one? While I don't support many of his domestic policies and campaign tactics, one would think overseeing the peaceful collapse of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany would make him a strong contender. Did Iran Contra, Panama, or something he did while at the CIA rule him out?
+1
level 79
Dec 21, 2018
Gorbachev got one.
+1
level 76
Dec 22, 2018
^ yeah Bush didn't really have much to do with it. Not saying that he wasn't a very capable leader when it came to negotiating foreign policy, but the Soviet Union was already on its way out.
+4
level 49
Dec 21, 2018
Obama? Carter? Wilson? Just goes to show what a joke the Nobel Peace Prize is.
+4
level 76
Dec 22, 2018
Carter won in 2002, many years after leaving office, and he has been working tirelessly the whole time since leaving office to promote peace and human development.
Wilson thought up the League of Nations, the forerunner of the United Nations.

Who do you think should have won?
+1
level 57
Dec 22, 2018
*Insert Generic Republican Comment* I think Reagan or Kennedy should have got one
+1
level 76
Dec 22, 2018
I sort of meant the same years that Wilson and Carter won. Were there better candidates those years?
+1
level 57
Dec 23, 2018
Well in 2002 Reagan was still alive and for Wilson's 1919 prize, there really isn't any other presidential contender other than Teddy who already won, so I guess Wilson just shouldn't have got the prize in the first place
+1
level 76
Dec 28, 2018
Was Reagan working as much as Carter after leaving office toward world peace? No. And you're saying that the prize should not have been awarded in 1919 because you dislike Wilson?
+1
level 57
Dec 29, 2018
It's not that I just dislike Wilson, he was not a good person or president. He enacted many Jim Crow laws such as segregation in government workplaces while he was president.
+1
level 76
Apr 17, 2019
It's no secret that Wilson was a racist, but he wasn't given the Nobel for his views on racial equity or for his achievements as US president, it was because he was the leading architect of the League of Nations, an organization dedicated to preserving world peace. He deserved it.
+2
level 31
Apr 17, 2019
It is easy with the dates