TGLS wrote:Presidents don't win points for what they do or don't do. Presidents win points on what happens. Truman did a bunch of unpopular things that might have gone badly, but it worked out, and he's remembered fondly.
Depending on how you feel about his being the only world leader so far to have dropped nukes on civilians.
Eisenhower signed a peace that was inevitable, and presided over a good time. For this, he is remembered well.
I'd argue that that's far from the only thing that Eisenhower's remembered fondly for.
Coolidge signed legislation that did bad after his presidency, and for this he is not remembered fondly.
That's something he did, though, not something that just happened.
Ford pardoned Nixon's and is not remembered fondly. Carter governed through an oil crisis and Americans were kidnapped, not fondly. Clinton swept in and claimed the peace dividend, fondly.
Can't really quibble with these too much. Clinton should get a bit of credit for getting the budget balanced for the only time in my lifetime, though.
Bush came in controversially, started fairly inevitable wars, and the economy collapsed, not fondly.
Iraq was far from inevitable, and there's a pretty good case to be made for Bush's policies contributing to the 2008 collapse as well.
Looking at these, it would appear that presidents lose, for things that aren't entirely their fault... Swap Gore and Bush, and Gore's rank could very well be the same.
With Gore, we probably would have still been in Afghanistan, but Iraq is questionable. Whether Gore would have passed tougher regulations to try to prevent the abuses that led to the 2008 housing crisis, well, I suppose it would have been tough to do with a hostile Congress. We'll never know, I suppose.
