Was Clinton a Great President?
A friend recently claimed that Clinton was a great president, far above Bush. I highly doubt that Clinton will go down even as an above average president. There is no chance for him to be seen as great. Great Presidents are those who had a major impact on the history of the nation. Washington, is the greatest as he defined what it meant to be President. Lincoln is next for holding the union together thereby defining the national government. FDR is third for the Great Society and the centralization of power in Washington. Closely behind them would be Jackson and Reagan.
The simple fact is that Clinton didn’t do all that much, and much of what he did do was forced on him by a republican Congress. His last few years was marked more by stalemate than anything else. Yes he had a good economy, but it is hard to trace this economy to any particular policy. In fact it was more a result of the emergence of the Internet and the resulting bubble it created. But the bubble burst in March of 2000, and we were sliding toward recession most of his last year in office. Clinton’s main focus was keeping his poll numbers up, and this he did very well.
The most damaging thing for Clinton’s legacy will be his almost complete inaction on the growing threat of terrorisms. Just like the president leading up to the Civil war are faulted for ignoring slavery, until the issue exploded, Presidents before 9/11 will be faulted for ignoring the growing threat of terrorism. This will particularly hit Clinton hard, for he had many attacks, including the first attack on the world trade center. He gave great speeches, but his actions seem aimed more at sweeping the problem under the rug, rather than dealing with it.
In a ranking of Presidents done in October 2000 by the Federalist Society using scholars form across the political spectrum, Clinton ranked #24, Average, just below Martin Van Buren, and just above Calvin Coolidge. That was before 9/11 and the issue of Terrorism became clear, and I suspect was his high water mark in history.
Bush, on the other hand, has the chance, (and it is just a chance) to be a great president. He was faced with a major crisis, he dealt with it. He has fundamentally changed the focus of American Foreign policy into one that actively promotes democracy. On the domestic front he is seeking to transform the society away from dependents on government into one of independence through ownership. It is still too early to say if these policies will be passed or successful, or if the war on Terrorism will succeed. But if they do Bush could easily take a place as one of the near greats if not great Presidents in American History.
As for popularity, all of the Great Presidents, except Washington, were very polarizing during there time, as Bush is now. Great Presidents are marked by change and people do not like change.
