You misspelled Pulaski (I know it is just a typo).
I never thought he was bad. I always did think he was ineffective, but that was due to the Radical Republicans. His intentions were noble and good, but he was denied doing what would have shaved 50 years off of the reconstruction of the south by a vindictive North. That seems to still be the attitude in many quarters today.
I think you did a very good Job on Andrew. I cant argue with the rankings because intentions are not deeds. IN his case, that is a real shame as he would have been as good as Lincoln if he had been given a chance.