Visits to then-colonized nations (e.g. Bahamas) do not count for the colonizing power. Dissolved countries (e.g. Soviet Union) do not count for its legal successor.
The first international trip was made on November 14, 1906 by Theodore Roosevelt
To Cao: Don't know about this... but I'm sure the leaders include Virginia, Maryland, Iowa, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Hampshire... for obvious reasons.
An interesting tidbit I just learned today: 4 presidents have visited all 50 US states while in office: Nixon was the first, and he was followed by Bush Sr., Clinton, and most recently Barack Obama.
What's the point of visiting the Vatican? They don't trade or have any foreign policy to speak of. Is it just to get support from the Christian voters in America? Seems like a waste of everyone's time and money
Without getting into the actual value of meeting with the Pope, you may notice that the Vatican was visited 9 times fewer than Italy. One can reasonably imagine that, "when in Rome," you should swing by the Vatican, thus wasting very little time and money...
I suppose you're right that it wouldn't be much of a resource dump if the President is already in Italy/Rome. I still wonder about the point though. Besides the "I'm famous and you're famous, so let's meet and do a photo op", is anything actually accomplished at a President-Pope meeting? 20 President-Pope meetings is a lot.
The Pope is a very influential person as the head of one of the world's largest religions. In general, the Pope's positions are supportive of the USA so it makes perfect sense to meet with him periodically.
If you've ever had an important discussion, or negotiation, you know that face to face is much better than over the phone. Reading body language is still too vital in human communication to dismiss important topics to just a phone. Now, with the invention of tele-conferncing, you could have a point. But there are additional implications made through visits beyond just what is discussed by the two parties. From showing support to showing disdain can all be accomplished by who gets a visit and who doesn't.
Because it's more clear than ever that the president and his allies in Washington are behaving like foreign assets but so many ignorant people are still in a state of denial about this?
To be honest, nowadays there's zero practical need of presencial meetings with any leaders whatsoever. Any communication can be done with Sype-style (obviously cryptography-enabled). These international meetings are 100% about P.R., there are huge political gains with these encounters.
There's a lot to gain PR-wise from international meetings, but a remote interaction on a screen doesn't allow for the complex, personal, often subtle, interactions that you can have in person and that are so necessary for diplomacy -- or a number of other things. Just think of how learning k-PhD was impacted by the pandemic.
Even in our secularised world, the pope is still considered a great moral power. He's also the spiritual leader to more than a billion people, so there are your reasons.
Not only that but there is a lot of diplomacy that is done through the Vatican. A lot of back channels are available that otherwise wouldn't be. It's very effective in getting communications to and from the Arab world to Israel.
The majority of Christian voters in America are not Catholic, and some Christians are outright hostile to Catholicism. Presidents who rely on support from Christians (basically Republicans these days) get that support from Protestant strongholds. Catholics are situated mostly in Democratic strongholds, i.e., cities and suburbs. That's not to say Catholics are Democrats, but when you think of the passionate Christian Republican base, you're thinking of Protestants.
It makes perfect sense why any sitting president would want to visit the Vatican. Contrary to what many may believe (or wish to be true) the largest religion by percentage of population in the US is Christian. Many of those Christians are Catholic. Since many Christian voters weigh social issues more heavily than others, it only makes sense for the president to have a conversation with the Pope to see what is important to Christians, and more specifically Catholics.
I have never heard anyone suggest that any religion besides Christianity is the biggest in the US. Only 20% of the American Christian population is Catholic.
Yeah @Froststar is right; about 20% of the total American population is Catholic. If you judge by American Christians alone, Catholics make up nearly 30% of the population. Regardless of how you look at it, Catholics are a significant portion of the US population.
Netherlands are at five visits, the first one in 1989. I think it's less because of the EU headquarters but more due to the NATO headquarters, which is also in Brussels
Remarkable that several countries - Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam - where the US waged war for years, where thousands of Americans have died, don't even crack the top 20. Really shows the political disconnect with the reality on the ground. But, ya know, gotta get your picture taken with the Pope!
Well regularly sending the President of the United States into an active war zone probably isn't the best idea. Getting photos with soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan are worth way more political points than a photo with the Pope so I don't see your point. If it was as safe and simple to visit Afghanistan, Iraq etc. as it is to visit the Vatican, Presidents would travel there much more frequently.
So happy Denmark is not getting a +1 now that Trump has cancelled his trip because he got mad a Woman told him he couldn't buy Greenland. I'm pretty sure that if he took an European countries quiz here, that he would be unable to even locate Denmark.
Only missed philippines. Do wonder about the in and exclusion of some, like why is poland so high compared to other european countries. Would ve expected norway or the netherlands before poland.
Poland has been America's most important diplomatic, military, and strategic partner in Eastern Europe since 1989 when Poland rejected Communism and then joined NATO the following year. Poland has had the USA's back through pretty much everything since then, even for Bush Jr's escapades in Iraq, and they remain one of the most vocal advocates for a US military presence in Europe. There are also historic cultural ties going back to America's founding, as there are quite a lot of Polish families in the US.
Fascinating to see the differences between countries (which do have obvious reasons, of course). Just checked the Wikipedia page for Angela Merkel. Turns out she has been on a lot more official foreign trips than are on the list here, which is for all U.S. presidents combined. Even though the list for the U.S. presidents contains only the top 21 most visited countries, she might well be in the lead overall. She made 40 international trips in 2019 alone, which seems to have been quite a normal year for her.
yeah but to make an "international" trip in Europe just means going outside and walking for 30 minutes in any random direction. The United States is a bit more isolated.
An official visit by the president to another country is usually a big deal. I remember when Obama was in my city and the preperations were nuts. They even sealed the drains on the streets so no one would pop out of there, possibly with explosives or whatever.
Scheduled trips to Germany, UK, Vietnam, Philippines (if that happens)
Yep SA and Russia, sounds about right...........
An interesting tidbit I just learned today: 4 presidents have visited all 50 US states while in office: Nixon was the first, and he was followed by Bush Sr., Clinton, and most recently Barack Obama.
Since the invention of the telephone I think this is the point of pretty much *every* presidential visit.
It's a little bit sad determining the value of a meeting only by economical interests. There's more to live than this.
Besides, U.S. Presidents spending time and money to visit known terrorist states like Palestine that don't help anyone should be more concerning.
Great quiz :)
uh... the Prez-a-razzi? POTUS-scopus? No, those don't really work...
It's the State Department.