Barack Obama: the most successful US President since FDR

[pnwmom]

The writer actually says the most successful Democrat since FDR -- but I dispute the idea that Reagan was equally successful.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/opinion/the-most-successful-democrat-since-fdr.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region

Obama leaves office as the most successful Democrat since Franklin Roosevelt. His effect on the “trajectory of America,” to use his benchmark, was certainly smaller than Roosevelt’s, but is in the same league as Reagan’s. Obama did more while in office, while Reagan better protected his policy changes, thanks to Republican gains in state and congressional elections — and the victory of his chosen successor.

Obama’s glaring failure on that last count leaves his allies needing to fight, hard, to defend their successes, rather than to make further progress on problems that badly need it, like climate and inequality. But it’s a testament to the last eight years that progressives have so much to defend.

“Any large scale of reordering of power and resources in American life will inevitably face resistance, sometimes for decades,” Chait writes. It happened after Reconstruction, the New Deal and the civil rights movement. But by continuing to fight, through victory and setback, the advocates of a freer, more broadly prosperous country won many more than they lost.

When future historians look back on today, they’re likely to come to a similar conclusion. They are also likely to believe that Obama’s vision of America was far superior to Trump’s. After all, a vast majority of Americans born in the last few decades share Obama’s vision. And history is ultimately written by the young.

[HassleCat]

1. Reagan was very successful.

He was our worst president, and a criminal, but he was good at it, and the public supported him.

[pnwmom]

2. Success at being a criminal doesn't count, at least for me. n/t

[Hekate]

5. Well, pnwmom, there was a reason Obama said he wanted "to be a consequential president...

Last edited Tue Jan 17, 2017, 11:35 PM - Edit history (1)

....like Reagan was." It got a lot of outrage here at the time, because (imo) people chose to misconstrue the statement.

Reagan got shit done and made a lasting impact. What he got done was shit and the lasting impact was bad.

Obama meant to get good things done and have a lasting impact of a good nature. But that was the rhetorical connection. He wanted to be consequential.

[pnwmom]

6. It's true Reagan was consequential. But DT could be consequential too --

and I know neither of us will ever rank him as one of the great Presidents.

[Hekate]

7. Gods help us all. We're in for a bumpy ride.

[loyalsister]

17. That is exactly why I hope Trump fails

bigly.

[dionysus]

3. Oh, reagan was ... just that his goals weren't taking care of us.

[underpants]

4. Excellent read

[StevieM]

8. LBJ would be an all-time great if not for the Vietnam War.

I realize that Vietnam cannot be ignored in assessing his legacy.

But we should never forget all the good that he did.

[NNadir]

9. I agree.

In ranking the Democratic Presidents since, and including, FDR, I'd select, #1 FDR. #2 Obama. #3 Truman. #4 Kennedy #5 Carter.

Truman and Obama are a tough call, but I note, that retrospectively, although he was unpopular in his own time, many historians rate Mr. Truman in the top 10. Truman I think did better than Obama on the international stage, and Obama, better domestically, but both were great Presidents.

Now we surely need to make room at the bottom, with a "President" who will manage to be worse than Pierce, Bush II, and Buchanan. That's a tough trick.

The good news is that the country survived Pierce, Bush II and Buchanan, although a great deal of bloodshed was required to survive Buchanan.

Many historians feel that Kennedy has long been over-rated, and I'd agree, although his embrace of the Space program helped built the technological golden age at the end of the 20th century.

[montana_hazeleyes]

10. I was 14 when President Kennedy was murdered.

I remember him as a president who had people of all ages looking forward and hopeful. He started many good programs to help people worldwide and here at home.

He cared deeply for this country and the people. Had he not been cut down I feel he could have gone on to do a lot of good for everyone.

I have albums of his speeches. He talked of things that were ahead of his time. He was president when things were starting to change and he didn't have time to do what I know he wanted to do.

Just my opinion.

[NNadir]

13. Well, I understand your perspective, but while I was a little younger than you...

...what I recall was as a ten year old going to the bus stop for school, and discussing with my friends whether we would all be vaporized in the afternoon in a nuclear attack.

As an adult, reading the history of the time, I have come to understand that he stumbled into that threat by a very poor performance at the Vienna summit with the Soviets and a number of other factors.

Kennedy was very much a cold warrior, campaigned on a non-existent "missile gap" and was often unnecessarily provocative in his policy. Even the commitment to the space program must be seen in the context of the cold war.

I'm not convinced that he would have behaved differently than Johnson on Vietnam. In fact, Johnson's advisers were all Kennedy men.

I grant you that he was an inspiring speaker, but my feeling is that his rhetoric was better than his actions. I don't think he was in a position to have the same success on Civil Rights as Lyndon Johnson did, and I consider that he was only lukewarm on the topic. I mean the March on Washington took place during his administration, and he watched it on television.

Johnson, by contrast, had Dr. King visit the White House and was considered by Dr. King to be a partner in the struggle, specifically stating that he was convinced that that Johnson's words of support were not merely platitudes to conceal indifference.

One person who was deeply dissatisfied with Kennedy on Civil Rights was my personal favorite Democrat in the 20th century, Eleanor Roosevelt. Of course the Roosevelt's and Kennedy's had long been at odds over Joseph Kennedy's fondness for appeasing Hitler, but still...

I think she was genuinely upset by how Kennedy was acting on Civil Rights, and that her personal distaste for the Kennedy family didn't have all that much to do with it.

I wrote about this elsewhere: The Nuclear Shill Apologizes

I think Kennedy is over rated. No one wished for Kennedy to be assassinated, but Johnson was a better President.

[brush]

11. So where would you rank LBJ? His "Great Society" programs and civil rights ...

achievements rank right up there with FDR's.

Vietnam of course stains his legacy.

[NNadir]

14. I seem to have neglected him, which is odd, because I'm an admirer of him.

Last edited Thu Jan 19, 2017, 09:34 PM - Edit history (1)

One could argue that Truman had Korea, as LBJ had Vietnam.

Korea was different than Vietnam, and frankly, I think Truman managed Korea much better than Johnson did Vietnam. The shining moment in Korea for Truman was firing MacArthur. He also got a UN sanction to fight that war. The result is also clear. South Korea is a major economic world power today, while North Korea is a hereditary monarchy ruled by a Trumpish King.

Truman's Berlin airlift was gutsy, particularly since Stalin was clearly insane. Truman oversaw the building of the UN, and appointed the greatest Ambassador to the UN we ever had, Ms. Roosevelt.

Truman desegregated the armed forces even though there was very little pressure (or political advantage) to do so.

I'd have to rank LBJ after Truman but certainly much higher than his predecessor, Mr. Kennedy.

LBJ has some pretty big stains, Vietnam the worst, some of these derive from inheriting a cabinet populated by Mr. Kennedy with his cold warrior beliefs.

LBJ was definitely the second greatest President on Civil Rights, exceeded only by Ulysses S. Grant, who moved African Americans into full citizenship and who held, against much opposition, to reconstruction's vision.

[brush]

15. Good stuff. Are you a historian and/or history buff?

[NNadir]

16. Just a buff, although I do read lots of serious academic historians and watch serious lectures on...

...the subject.

I spend a lot of time reading and thinking about the US Presidency.

It can be scary, especially now.

We are about to remove James Buchanan from the list of the worst Presidents ever, Buchanan having come the closest to permanently dismantling the United States.

We will need another Lincoln after tomorrow, and Lincolns are hard to come by.

Thank you for your kind words.

[BumRushDaShow]

12. LBJ

with Civil Rights leaders holding feet to the fire, was able to shepherd through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 & Voting Rights Act of 1965 (despite the many racist boll weevil Democrats). These were major major pieces of legislation that positively impacted the black community, although it has been a 50+ year struggle to uphold them. Add to that the amendment to OASDI (Old Age, Survivor, and Disibility Insurance - aka "Social Security&quot to create Medicare, and he can't be left off the list - despite his own racially-insensitive traits and liberal use of J. Edgar Hoover.