How will history remember Bill Clinton's presidency?

[ALago1]

I love President Clinton and long for the days of peace and prosperity that he presided over during his two terms.

Yet I've been thinking recently about how history will remember this man in the grand scheme of things decades and millenia later.

Obviously he was not a president whose performance mirrors that of Lincoln or FDR so I don't think he'll be remembered as being a "great" president. I think this is due to the fact that the U.S. faced no great conflict during his tenure and thus he had no venue with which to show his potential leadership credentials.

Putting all my partisan emotions and personal admiration for the man aside, I think he'll be recognized as merely an average, perhaps above average president years down the road.

What do you think?

[K-W]

1. History is written by the victors.

All of the history of our time will depend on who is writing it. If the conservatives retain control for a significant amount of time it will probably just be remembered for the sex scandal.

[ALago1]

3. True

But nobody can ignore or spin the largest economic expansion in the history of our country that he presided over. I doubt any historian will make such an omission.

[Yupster]

28. What other presidents are known principally for

the good economy during their terms?

Presidents just aren't remembered for that. Economies go up and down, and the only presidents remembered for the economy are Hoover and FDR because there was a great depression.

[mark11727]

5. I see your point, but you may be thinking too narrow...

...there are historians world-wide, and they will probably not be controlled by any conservative influences here in the states. For example, may European newspapers and website offer much more accurate and compelling news reporting than our domestic media outlets.

[NMDemDist2]

2. as a good president hounded by partisan weasels IMO n/t

[erpowers]

9. I agree

Many of the greatest things Clinton wanted to do was blocked by Republicans who wanted to tarnish his image. If the Republicans had worked with Clinton there would have been no 9/11. Clinton tried to do many things to protect this country from Terrorism, but the Republicans refused to let him be great. Every thing Bush did after 9/11 was from the Clinton administration.

[ThomWV]

24. I would Agree, but say Very Good

[SarahB]

36. Exactly.

Powers misused beyond belief. Still kills me.

[salib]

4. My first thought ...

Is that this is a lame question. However, I think that history, if we do not lose this fight and let the "victors write the history", will see Carter and Clinton as the little bit of clarity and normality within a sea of unfortunate radical bigotry that has been the republican admin's. It is a shame that this cabal, set in place by Nixon (but, do not forget that Eisenhower picked him), has managed to do so much harm to what has been seen as a great country. Such great harm over more than a quarter of a century is going to be long in the repairing.

[beachman]

6. Calvin Coolidge maybe

President who presided over good times, but did not have a lot major legislative intiatives work out, or grand new programs or wars or anything that defined the presidency, except of course, he will be remembered for being impeached but retaining his office.

On terrorism, who can say? Maybe that depends on whether the problem gets worse. I do think one of the failings that will be mentioned is not doing anything about the energy issue, but no one else has tried really, except maybe Jimmy Carter.

More than that, who can say?

I think that historians may see Clinton's presidency as perhaps part of a trend towards a more conservative government in the 80s and 90s. Clinton was not actually that centrist in the beginning, but he never campaigned on liberal themes, and thus his victories in some ways were hollow. Heck, he campaigned to the right of Bob Dole in a lot of ways.

He never had a mandate, or sweeping margin of victory, and it is arguable that he played a big role in the conservative take-over of Congress by not really putting forth an alternative agenda, other than GOP-lite.

I think the fundraising stuff will hurt his legacy a lot more down the road.

But still, it's not like there was a great defining event in the 90s for the government, and so there probably won't be tons of "Clinton scholars", hence the Coolidge comment.

[ALago1]

8. "I think the fundraising stuff will hurt his legacy a lot more..."

Can you elaborate on the "fundraising stuff"? I don't think I know what you are referring to...

[beachman]

15. if you don't know, I'm not sharing

The DNC was fined some significant fines as a result, imo, of the White House's leadership at the time. I think when historians look at his presidency, they will compare it to others such as the last democratic president, who was also a southerner, and conclude that Clinton's team pushed the envelope to put it mildly.

What may evolve, looking at Howard Dean's efforts via the Net, is significant fundraising legally from people, at least that is my hope, and I think Clinton's methods will look unsavory in that light.

[ALago1]

16. Wow, you're being really oblique

Still have no idea what you're talking about, so I guess I can't pursue this further...

[The Backlash Cometh]

18. I think he's referring to the Lincoln bedroom. Which is peanuts compared

to what Bush has been doing without ne'er a peep from the Republican voter or right-wing talk radio shark. Members who make it into the Pioneer Club are treated much better than anything the Democrats ever did. And, add to that, that I believe that that little fiasco over some Texans on a U.S. sub which collided with a fishing boat, may have been a perk gone wrong.

[randr]

7. Comic Relief

[LostInAnomie]

10. I don't think he will be remembered as harshly as some might think.

Especially about the sex scandal. As time goes by our culture has became more sexually permissive. It is bound to continue, no matter how hard the cons try to fight it.

It is more likely that they will look harshly on the Repigs and their witchhunt. They will be remembered as the prudish hypocrites that they are.

[DeepModem Mom]

11. The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette asked a number of scholars...

this question, and printed this article, which goes on to evaluate many aspects of the Clinton Presidency, in a somewhat favorable light:


Clinton presidency rated mostly good

Scholars say legacy is still being formed

BY PAUL BARTON ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-GAZETTE

WASHINGTON — A "B" to "B-plus" presidency that could have been an "A." Three and one-half years after leaving office, that’s still the legacy of former President Clinton, many scholars say.

With his highly awaited 957-page memoir My Life hitting bookstores June 22, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette contacted more than a dozen prominent presidential historians and political scientists nationwide to see how they now view Clinton’s presidency.

Several cautioned that it is still too early for a firm assessment. Others said the passage of time has already started to improve his legacy. Still others said the outcome of George W. Bush’s presidency will likely force new views of Clinton’s, one way or another.

"We always interpret past presidents in terms of recent experience. The legacy right now remains pretty substantially in a state of flux," said Bruce Buchanan of the University of Texas....



http://epaper.ardemgaz.com/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:ArticleToMail&Type=text/html&Path=ArDemocrat/2004/06/13&ID=Ar00103

[tritsofme]

12. Impeachment,

Ask a man on the street who was president during the 1920s and thats how many people will remember Clinton 80 years from now.

Like it or not, Clinton was only the second president ever to be impeached, and that is what will be remembered about him.

[ALago1]

14. His impeachment was a fiasco

I think historians will undoubtedly put the impeachment in a cultural persepective and describe the ridiculous witch hunt that caused Clinton to be hounded the way he was.

[The Backlash Cometh]

13. If the Clintons manage to distance themselves from

previous wedge issues, such as NAFTA and bowing down to the pro-Israeli lobby, I predict that they both will be perceived well as time goes on.

[Southsideirish]

17. I never liked or trusted him and I am a true "yellow dog" Dem - there

was just something about him I couldn't abide.

[lancdem]

19. It's really hard to say, except that I'm certain he'll be

better regarded years from now because the memory of the Lewinsky mess will have faded more than his accomplishments. I just read an article someone posted on DU where the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette surveyed more than a dozen prominent scholars and historian, and they gave Clinton a B or B plus, which I consider quite good, actually, at this point.

[DoNotRefill]

20. Badly....

What do people remember about Andy Jackson? That he was impeached.

[tritsofme]

21. They remember so much about him.....

that they can't even remember his name. LOL

Andrew Johnson was impeached, not Andrew Jackson.

Point proven.

[DoNotRefill]

22. Close enough... ;)

DNR

[NMDemDist2]

25. hmmm I don't , I remember the rumors that he was a drunk

but that's just me

[DoNotRefill]

26. I thought that was Grant?

eom

[NMDemDist2]

31. just shows my iron jawed grasp of american history n/t

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[VolcanoJen]

27. I think he'll be treated well.

I think historians will attach a sort-of carefree, nostalgic glow to the Clinton Years... a time of "innocence" and "wealth" and "good music" and "good times," before we had our asses handed to us on 9/11.

It's also important to remember that Clinton, who's not even 60 yet, will likely live another 30-odd years. Who knows what kind of perspective we'll have then, and what shape his presidency will take in hindsight?

I just happen to think he'll be treated well, as a man who presided over happy times for most Americans. I most certainly feel that way about him... and while he was President, at least I felt safe.

[BillZBubb]

29. He'll be among the top five presidents of the 20th century.

Aside from his personal moral lapses, he was very successful. He was the top guy in economics. He will be remembered for actually getting the budget to a surplus almost as much as for the tremendous growth with low inflation.

As you said, without a serious war, it's hard to break into the great category. But Clinton was a near great and history will eventually record that.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BillZBubb]

33. Hello, Goodbye!

Reagan and Bush were two of the worst presidents of the 20th century. Reagan nearly bankrupted the country. He tripled the US debt in 8 years. 70% of the people ended up paying MORE taxes during his term. Only the 20% at the top saw their standard of living improve. Average real wages declined. Supply side economics was a total failure. Economic growth during the 1980's was BELOW the real growth in the 1970's. Poverty levels shot up. Unemployment remained high. The US supported terrorists and drug dealers in Central America.

And I suppose Clinton's success was based on GHW Bush's recession? What was GHW Bush's recession based on? Reagan?

Get a clue dude.

[JI7]

32. a man who worked hard for the people by rising above partisan politics

even while being one of the biggest victims of partisan politics played by the other side. he still did not take it personally or at least tried not to because his goal was to help the people and he needed some republican votes for that. i think he could be on the same level as teddy roosevelt.

[Yupster]

35. Same level as Teddy Roosevelt

Notable changes to the country began by Teddy Roosevelt...

* Trustbusting
* Pure Food and Drug Act
* First National Parks
* Construction of Panama Canal

* Famous quote - "Speak softly and carry a big stick."

Notable changes to the country began by Bill Clinton ...

* NAFTA?
* Ended welfare entitlement?
* ?
* ?

* Famous quote - oh never mind

Yeah - looks to be about the same level to me <sarcasm>.

[JayS]

38. "his goal was to help the people"

Well, except for when he needed a "made for TV" event in places like Waco.

He could have really made a name for himself if he had halted the War On Drugs and instituted a more logical approach to the drug problem. This would have stopped much of the gun violence he sought to stop by passing toothless laws to combat nothing.

[WI_DEM]

34. history will record that he presided over a time of general peace

and prosperity. That during his administration the budget was balanced and welfare reform enacted and that the Democratic party moved to the center. It will also record that his presidency was wracked by many scandals--mostly minor, and that he was impeached but not convicted--whether they will call the impeachment a political witchhunt depends on who the historian is.

[Merlin]

37. Clinton the man will be bigger than Clinton the President, imo.

He has a lot more gas in the tank. I still think he'll wind up as Secretary General of the UN or in some other role in which he can make a contribution.

His role as elder statesman will make him--ala Carter--a man more respected for his overall contributions than his actual presidency.

That being said, the level of excellence in all aspects of government in the Clinton presidency was unprecedented in my lifetime. I'd like to believe historians will recognize that, but I have my doubts.

[Spazito]

39. I think Clinton will be looked upon kindly as a President who,

although humanly flawed, served his country well. His impeachment will always have an asterisk attached showing that it was political, not legal in the true definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors". Those outside the United States could not comprehend how the US public could buy such an obvious and clumsy attempt to remove a sitting President for political, not legal, reasons will be part of the historical record.

I find it fascinating that George Bush and Bill Clinton will both have asterisks next to their names in the history books, one for a false impeachment process the other for a false election outcome.

[JCMach1]

40. A late 20th century Grover Cleveland

liked, popular, but ultimately a little disappointing... also, president during boring times...

Of course, that's not a bad thing.



Clinton... think middle of the Presidential pile.