FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


How will History view Obama's presidency?





Mr_Howl
Saw this on Reddit and thought it was interesting. Also thought it would be nice to see something positive on here.

Quoting user ucstruct:

Quote:

The best way to answer this is I think how historians in the future will answer it, by looking at his major achievements and their historical context, just like we do for past presidents. On these criteria, he does pretty well.

  • Averted a 2nd great depression and led the country from severe negative growth to positive, but modest growth. Financial recessions aren't like other kinds, and are often long and painful like this when things go well. Compares to FDR from 1932-1937, which history looks at admirably.
  • Peaceful (somewhat) withdrawal from Iraq. Compares to Nixon, though there it was withdrawal leaving a regime unfavorable to the US, here its a democracy, for what its worth anyway. Pretty good achievement, though his record as Senator voting against the surge seems now to be misguided.
  • Commitment to withdraw from a second armed conflict. The verdict is out on this one, although it looks like the situation is pretty bad right now.
  • Defeat of a major foreign enemy. The decimation of Al queda from a force that everyone was overtly paranoid about to a backwater extremist outfit was a major accomplishment, not on the order of the United States victories in WWII but still very significant. Compares somewhat to FDR in this one.
  • Passage of major social legislature. The ACA, if upheld, will be without question a program as influential as social security. Compares maybe to FDR.
  • Civil rights. His outright support of gay marriage seems to be a watershed moment in the struggle for civil rights. It awaits to be seen if he follows through with any of it, though he did repeal DODT and ordered the DOJ to stop supporting DOMA, so it looks like he'll try. If he does, he'll be similar to Johnson.

Listed like this, I'd put him maybe in the top 10 of all presidents, probably not the top 5. He's like an FDR-lite with some of the better qualities of Johnson and Nixon mixed in. He didn't have to surmount the challenge FDR did, but he also instituted some very significant lasting changes on society. What are the negatives that even come close? Too slow of a recovery during the worst recession many of us has ever seen? Too much willingness to prosecute a war to destroy an organization that killed thousands of Americans in an unprovoked attack? Not enough movement on social issues? I think that if anyone looks at history, and compares his record to how other presidents performed with similar circumstances, you can't help but to look at it favorably.


Not so sure if I agree with "Top 10", especially given the NDAA and all...

Thoughts?
johans
I dont know that much with Obama because i live here in asian country.. but when i comes to international community Obama is good and very good president..

I have heard much on American dream, there is a survey just posted yesterday "is American dream true?" will you can vote here..

http://fastsurvey.org/list-of-surveys/8-american-dream
ocalhoun
Your list leaves out one crucial fact... and that's the one thing that schoolchildren will be learning about him 50 years from now:

First black president.


The war on terror will be about as memorable as the korean war is today, so his actions in it will be a little obscure.
(Without looking it up, who was president during the korean war? Name a couple of his actions that affected the outcome.)

Likewise, his domestic policies will fade into obscurity...
(Without looking it up, which president started medicare?)

And his progress for gays?
(Again, no cheating with wikipedia... which president first desegregated a branch of the military?)
Afaceinthematrix
ocalhoun wrote:
First black president.


Which I find to be irrelevant considering that he was elected in 2008. Jackie Robinson was the first black player in the MLB in 1947. Hattie McDaniel was the first black person to win an Oscar. Michael Healy was the first black person to command a U.S. ship. Etc. Actually, let me Google this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_firsts

At some point you have to eventually quit doing this first black person to do whatever because it just gets out of hand and when the civil rights movement has been over for 50 years, it's not impressive anymore. What are we going to keep track of next? First black person to eat an entire pizza in ten minutes? First black person drink a gallon of milk in 30 minutes? Just look at the bottom of that list. First black person to win the UCF lightweight championship? The UFC has only been around since 1993.

If Obama was elected in 1966 I would have been impressed. 2008? Hardly. If it had been a lesbian Muslim woman wearing hijab I would have been impressed.
Insanity
I think even though it's relatively recent, the first black president of the United States is still a HUGE deal. It's arguably the most powerful position in the entire world, as the power of the U.S. is pretty huge. Despite many racial barriers being broken, this is perhaps one of th ebiggest, and will undoubtedly be mentioned in history books that children read.
pauline123
I would agree that Obama will likely be known as the first black president for quite some time, if not forever. It is unfortunate in some ways that some people will never be able to see past that. His legislations and what he has accomplished are impressive but for some the fact that he is black will always be a the forefront. There are still some areas of the USA where organizations are still present, such as the KKK. To these groups I am sure the first thing they think of when thinking about Obama is that he is black. Another thing that will surely be thought about is his stance on civil rights for all.
Afaceinthematrix
Insanity wrote:
I think even though it's relatively recent, the first black president of the United States is still a HUGE deal. It's arguably the most powerful position in the entire world, as the power of the U.S. is pretty huge. Despite many racial barriers being broken, this is perhaps one of th ebiggest, and will undoubtedly be mentioned in history books that children read.


I still don't think that it is a huge deal. When does it stop? How many barriers have to be broken until it just isn't relevant anymore? I think that it probably became irrelevant in the 80s. Like I said, if a lesbian Muslim woman in hijab (I chose a woman so that I could add the in hijab detail) won the election then I would be impressed. There will always be bigots and white supremacy still exists. But it is on the fringes and basically confined to the deep south in hickville. All but the truly ignorant have moved on past that and so now, unfortunately, the most hated minorities in the States are homosexuals and Muslims... And even 'dem Arabs that aren't Muslim.
ocalhoun
Afaceinthematrix wrote:

I still don't think that it is a huge deal. When does it stop?

Maybe right here.

I've got a feeling that history writers will be very tempted to label the 'civil rights period' as ending in 2008.

It's likely that they will describe the presidency as the final barrier that was broken... The last great success of the civil rights movement.
zimmer
everyone makes history.. i guess Obama makes famous on our time being President of the United States..
Afaceinthematrix
ocalhoun wrote:
Afaceinthematrix wrote:

I still don't think that it is a huge deal. When does it stop?

Maybe right here.

I've got a feeling that history writers will be very tempted to label the 'civil rights period' as ending in 2008.

It's likely that they will describe the presidency as the final barrier that was broken... The last great success of the civil rights movement.


Yeah right. This is far too arbitrary. If a black astronaut walked on Mars you can't claim to me convincingly that we wouldn't have to hear about that on the news for weeks - and we haven't even had any person on Mars yet! We're going to still hear first black things for years and it really is getting irrelevant.

People moved on years and years ago and we could have had a black person elected at any point in the 90s... Maybe not the 80s because enough old bigots were probably still around in Southern Texas and hickville places. But even my old racist relatives have moved on.
truespeed
I think the fact that he was the first black president will make him more memorable than some of the presidents that went before him just for that reason. It is also still possible that he will remain the only black American President.
deanhills
truespeed wrote:
It is also still possible that he will remain the only black American President.
Why do you think so?
Afaceinthematrix
deanhills wrote:
truespeed wrote:
It is also still possible that he will remain the only black American President.
Why do you think so?


He can think so because it is a basic fact. He didn't say that Obama would probably be the only black American president or that he'd definitely be the only black American president; he just said that it is possible. It is possible that he'll be the only black American president until there is another one, then that statement will obviously be false. It is also possible that there will never be another white president, it's just unlikely.
jmraker
ocalhoun wrote:
Your list leaves out one crucial fact... and that's the one thing that schoolchildren will be learning about him 50 years from now:

First black president.



If so he was judged by the color of his skin and not by the content of his character.

Just like how George Washington is mostly known for being the first white president and Abraham Lincoln is mostly known as the first president who wore a top hat (and fought vampires)

William Henry Harrison is mostly known for being the first president to die
James Garfield is mostly known for being the first furry president who hated Mondays
Woodrow Wilson is mostly known for being the first president to be a volleyball
Herbert Hoover is mostly known for being the first president to use a vacuum
Bill Clinton is mostly known as the first president to feel pain

Before the executive branch/presidency was established, we had an ambigiously black or not black person in a similar position
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1771850/posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hanson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_Continental_Congress
Afaceinthematrix
jmraker wrote:
Just like how George Washington is mostly known for being the first white president


That's very clever. That's just like my example of if the first person to step foot on Mars is black then he/she will probably be known as the first black person on Mars despite the fact that nobody has ever been on Mars. But I like the way you put it. However, realistically, Obama will probably be remembered as the first black president because it annoys me since it should be irrelevant. And while we're at it, FDR was the first president in a wheelchair.
ocalhoun
Afaceinthematrix wrote:

Yeah right. This is far too arbitrary. If a black astronaut walked on Mars you can't claim to me convincingly that we wouldn't have to hear about that on the news for weeks - and we haven't even had any person on Mars yet! We're going to still hear first black things for years and it really is getting irrelevant.

True, but that's just the news for you... they're continually pedantic and irrelevant, and would play the race card just to raise their ratings a tad bit by luring in however few people actually still cared.
(And what's more, they could easily run the story after just reading a press release! If they can avoid having to do any actual journalism, they will.)

History books, I think, wouldn't include 'black man on Mars' as part of their section on the US civil rights movement though.
Iceaxe0410
It's really tough to say how history books will view Obama's presidency since he's still in office. I will say that there have been quite a few general events during his administration so far:

1. Becoming the first african american president.
2. Killing of Osama Bin Laden.
3. The passing of Obamacare.
4. Fast and Furious.
5. U.S. drops to AA rating

I'm almost certain history books will point out that he is the first African-american U.S. president. I think that's a given. Osama Bin Laden, I'm not too sure if he will be credited with that so much, but it definitely did have an impact on the "war on terrorism" which seems to be one of the major focuses during the past decade ever since 9/11.

Then you have the recent passing of Obamacare which still remains to be seen how it fares. I'm still on the fence on this one. I kind of predict it will just end up costing more tax dollars in the long run just as Medicare/Medicaid is doing. Who knows though, all I have is predictions. Won't know the real effects until it is well underway. I admit I have low expectations, but if it proves me wrong, all the better.

I definitely think Obama's administration will be looked at as expanding executive powers and big government (Obamacare). There has been no indication of cutting spending which we really need to do. I see no other way around it other than raise taxes. I really think both need to be done, but so far it seems little has been done on either front. Obama is just a small part of this of course. So it's hard to say if he will take the blame or if Congress and Federal Reserve will share the blame for the slow economy.

Then there's Fast and Furious. This has the potential to be really bad for Obama. So far, it's not picked up too much ground, but it may blow up the closer election time comes around. I look forward to seeing if this amounts to anything during this upcoming election.

I already mentioned the slow economy, but the U.S. dropping down to AA rating is noteworthy since it's never happened before. It really says a lot about the current state of the economy.

Overall, I'd say he has a good chance of being an average to below average president. So far on the scale, I'd put him below average since he pretty much hasn't done much other than introduce Obamacare and become a symbol for "change." Neither of which have been shown to be beneficial yet in his administration. Obamacare we will have to wait to see what the long term effects are. As for being a symbol of change, he had several opportunities to be the symbol of change he campaigned to be, but I fail to see any so far.

His second term should he win, will determine if he becomes the symbol of change so many people voting him in for the previous election.
deanhills
That's an excellent post Iceaxe0410! Really enjoyed reading it. Think I've been negligent in reading the news as missed the "Fast and Furious" potential Watergate scandal that may still break for Obama. Just checked it out and can't believe what I was reading. I'd have thought it would have been a huge international scandal, and not only a local one?

I don't think Obama has been a bad President, but a good President for me is one who is willing to make unpopular decisions for the greater good, like cutting expenditure and protecting the US$. I haven't seen Obama making any unpopular decisions. More like making decisions that are neutral or will "buy" him four more years as a President. He is a marketer first and foremost. Then hedges his decisions against that very cautiously. Now and then he loses one (i.e. a decision that ran counter to his popularity), but I'm sure he considered all of the bets when he made that decision and may regard it as collateral damage i.e. he did not have a choice, or he had to negotiate on it.
handfleisch
deanhills wrote:
That's an excellent post Iceaxe0410! Really enjoyed reading it. Think I've been negligent in reading the news as missed the "Fast and Furious" potential Watergate scandal that may still break for Obama. Just checked it out and can't believe what I was reading. I'd have thought it would have been a huge international scandal, and not only a local one?

I don't think Obama has been a bad President, but a good President for me is one who is willing to make unpopular decisions for the greater good, like cutting expenditure and protecting the US$. I haven't seen Obama making any unpopular decisions. More like making decisions that are neutral or will "buy" him four more years as a President. He is a marketer first and foremost. Then hedges his decisions against that very cautiously. Now and then he loses one (i.e. a decision that ran counter to his popularity), but I'm sure he considered all of the bets when he made that decision and may regard it as collateral damage i.e. he did not have a choice, or he had to negotiate on it.


FYI Dean, "Fast & Furious" is a fake scandal created for political reasons. It now has been debunked by Fortune magazine, the respected business magazine, which concluded not only that it's a fake scandal but that the core of the allegations did not happen at all -- there was no "gunwalking" program. Since the article in Fortune came out, the right wing has been very, very quiet about the fake scandal, because they know they've been caught. http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/27/fast-and-furious-truth/
Iceaxe0410
Interesting article, there are still many holes in it. I don't doubt that this will still be something that will linger on into the election. Even if there was no program, it doesn't deny that guns did indeed "walk" into Mexico cartels. It may not have been through the Fast and Furious program, but they did get over there nevertheless. If anything, it's the lack of oversight and accountability of the ATP and other agencies involved including the justice system.

From what I read, they didn't have enough to arrest anyone because the transactions were legal in Arizona according to their gun laws. Which is odd considering they went with it anyway. You would think they'd know enough before hand what they need in order to make arrests, but I guess that's asking too much of the government. In order to make arrests they needed more proof which was done by wiretapping the phones. Unfortunately, that was short lived because the gun seller was discontinuing the phone lines and they'd have to go through the entire process over again. They eventually did make arrests, but only after so many guns have gotten through into Mexico. Sigh... such a mess. The whole group got reassigned and some people resigned from their positions.

I think the main point of this whole thing is why Obama used executive privilege to halt the release of papers to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that's investigating the issue. The reason given is to protect ongoing investigations as a matter of National security, but for many people it makes it seem like he has something to hide. It's the reason Attorney General Holder was held in contempt. It's kind of pointless really since he will likely never see criminal prosecution or jail time. If Obama didn't place the executive privilege order, I think most of it would be a non-issue.

Whatever the truth is, it still has teeth. Could end up making things worse for Obama. Won't know until the elections come up.
deanhills
handfleisch wrote:
FYI Dean, "Fast & Furious" is a fake scandal created for political reasons. It now has been debunked by Fortune magazine, the respected business magazine, which concluded not only that it's a fake scandal but that the core of the allegations did not happen at all -- there was no "gunwalking" program. Since the article in Fortune came out, the right wing has been very, very quiet about the fake scandal, because they know they've been caught. http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/27/fast-and-furious-truth/
I don't know enough to judge the validity, but would have though if the President acted on it to the extreme extent he had there must have been something to it. Regardless of what had happened or not happened, that probably is deserving of some scrutiny. I agree with Iceaxe. It's probably going to be used against him and he must have known that at the time when he had made the decision.
handfleisch
deanhills wrote:
handfleisch wrote:
FYI Dean, "Fast & Furious" is a fake scandal created for political reasons. It now has been debunked by Fortune magazine, the respected business magazine, which concluded not only that it's a fake scandal but that the core of the allegations did not happen at all -- there was no "gunwalking" program. Since the article in Fortune came out, the right wing has been very, very quiet about the fake scandal, because they know they've been caught. http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2012/06/27/fast-and-furious-truth/
I don't know enough to judge the validity, but would have though if the President acted on it to the extreme extent he had there must have been something to it. Regardless of what had happened or not happened, that probably is deserving of some scrutiny. I agree with Iceaxe. It's probably going to be used against him and he must have known that at the time when he had made the decision.

It was a witchhunt.
After thousands of documents were turned over, Obama had to use executive privilege because wingnut Congressman Darryl Issa wanted documents related to ongoing operations and documents that AG Holder couldn't legally turn over to Congress. Obama's action wasn't extreme, Reagan used executive privilege 20 times.
And the issue is dead now, like I said the right wing have grown very quiet about it since Fortune magazine's in-depth investigation destroyed there whole case.
After all this time of the right attacking Obama, he's steal squeaky clean in terms of major scandals or wrongdoing.
deanhills
handfleisch wrote:
After all this time of the right attacking Obama, he's steal squeaky clean in terms of major scandals or wrongdoing.
Nice to hear. I wouldn't expect less of Obama in any case as he is super cautious to always be perceived to be doing the right thing. Even if there should be a scandal not necessarily of his doing, I'm sure he'd be winning against a guy like Romney. Really sad that Ron Paul could not get in to give Obama at least a little bit of competition.
codemaster
People will say he was a man who id great things for this country. It was George bush who left america how it is. People who don't like having a black president said it was Obama's plan. Senate is against Obama and try to twist every good doing of him around. Media hates him because he acts like he has dignity and respect. He doesn't attack people. Some of the media lies. Obama is a great president.
shoaib
In my opinion, world will criticize Obama's presidency because he failed to control the terrorism in the world and he is continuously making tension with Iran due to the israel. Iran now becomes threat for american people. America should not support israel because due to this policy Americans faces threats...
deanhills
shoaib wrote:
In my opinion, world will criticize Obama's presidency because he failed to control the terrorism in the world and he is continuously making tension with Iran due to the israel. Iran now becomes threat for american people. America should not support israel because due to this policy Americans faces threats...
I'd think failing to control terrorism is about the last thing that the US could ever be blamed for. It's almost bankrupted itself in its efforts to fight terrorism in the Middle East.

Is your country willing to contribute to the US funding for trying to get rid of terrorism? What has your country done to fight against terrorism?

I thought the tension with Iran is because Iran is creating nuclear armaments? How is Israel at fault for Iran building a nuclear capability?
Iceaxe0410
I think stopping nuclear capabilities is a losing battle. As time progresses, the technology will eventually get better to the point that it will make it very difficult to stop any one country from developing it. While this is happening, we should really be building up defenses here on American soil so that becomes a non issue. Develop technology to counteract the threat of nuclear attacks. It would be an expensive program no doubt, but at least it would be put to better use rather than declaring war on various countries, overthrowing the government, and occupying it until they are able to rebuild the government.

I say let the other countries handle their own problems. Not saying completely avoid them, but increase spending on covert operations and build up the CIA just so we know what they are up to. I really doubt foreign policy will be much of a factor on Obama's presidency or legacy unless if he's credited with pulling out of Iraq.

I say increase covert operations and CIA mostly because that's probably the most effective way to combat terrorism. It's a war against groups that have no fixed location or government. You need to find out information and where they are located first if there's any hope to win against it.
deanhills
Iceaxe0410 wrote:
I say let the other countries handle their own problems.
I think this is easier said than done. Taking the great economic crash at end of 2008 as an example the world economy had got itself so much integrated, would be difficult for the US to extract itself from its self-appointed watch dog commitment. For example, I'm sure there must be plenty of contracts for supplying armaments to key countries in the Middle East. That in its own right is providing jobs and income to the US. If the US should lower its profile to more neutral and start detaching itself from arrangements like that, then another country would step in and have the opportunity to make money instead. Being a top supplier in world armaments also helps to increase leadership in technology too, which has to be good for US as well.
Related topics
Keyword Research Tool
Obama
US Torture
Markets Responding to Possible Obama Win?
Obama Victory Speech
Hillary as Sec. of State
Tea Party Protests
Obama down in polls
Obama's Unemployment Numbers Keep Going Up
Obama
Employment situation improving under Obama
House votes to repeal Obama's Health Care Law
Republican New Hampshire Primary - Competition
2012: Barack Obama (D) vs Mitt Romney (R)
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.