A forum member writes: I was thinking about just what it takes to make a "good president of the US" and what it takes to make a "bad president of the US." It's possible to be idealistic, of course, and dream up characteristics on a whim, but there's another alternative, and that is of taking a look at people who have actually been POTUS over the last half century or so. Here's a chronological post-WW-II list: Truman (45-53), Eisenhower (53-61), Kennedy (61-63), Johnson (63-69), Nixon (69-74), Ford (74-77), Carter (77-81), Reagan (81-89), Bush, GHW (89-93), Clinton (93-01), Bush GW 2001-present. How would you rank-order them, in terms of "performance of the office of POTUS?" And perhaps, why?
There are so many different reasons why a president might be good or bad that it can be difficult to decide how to rank them. This is made more complex by the fact that what might make for a good president in one era would make for a bad president in another. How would you rank recent American presidents? Read More...
Comments
No comments yet. Leave a Comment