comment
stringlengths 1
9.86k
| context
listlengths 0
530
|
|---|---|
>
Who remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families."
] |
>
yeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected."
] |
>
How has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal"
] |
>
Obama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context."
] |
>
Idk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord."
] |
>
I hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk."
] |
>
I think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.
At which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.
Even 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.
And we were okay because it wasn't happening here.
And we really didn't have to look at it.
And we were told it kept us safe.
And we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.
And we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.
But we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions.
The consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.
And they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing."
] |
>
Not only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky."
] |
>
He’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.
Personally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power."
] |
>
No. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential."
] |
>
A more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI."
] |
>
Two terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)"
] |
>
And everyone since him as well.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine."
] |
>
I'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well."
] |
>
I doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't."
] |
>
Generally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party."
] |
>
It all depends how the next few decades go.
If our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.
If it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure "democracy" business.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic"
] |
>
It depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business."
] |
>
I'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama.
Like he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.
And I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo.
Like we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK.
The BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war.
We need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth."
] |
>
It simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga."
] |
>
As a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand."
] |
>
He got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies"
] |
>
Literally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.
So basically, an average President.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”"
] |
>
Obama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President."
] |
>
I think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh."
] |
>
He’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war)."
] |
>
How is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war."
] |
>
Because back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?"
] |
>
Absolutely.
Let me paint you a picture.
Think back to Bush Jr.
He wasn't so bad now was he?
Yes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.
Obama turned USA into an Orville state.
But history will view him as better.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party."
] |
>
Think back to Bush Jr.
He wasn't so bad now was he?
Yes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.
To be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.
Our last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.
He was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.
But compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better."
] |
>
When Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a "terrorist fist jab." Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.
No president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.
Despite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.
This is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.
The second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?"
] |
>
Obama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades."
] |
>
10th best of all time?
I guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it."
] |
>
10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much."
] |
>
Doubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.
HE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him)."
] |
>
What was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?
He couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more."
] |
>
What was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?
Challenged the Senate on the "advice and consent" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice."
] |
>
Dude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win."
] |
>
As more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death.
Honestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about."
] |
>
It was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat."
] |
>
This seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation.
W would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s."
] |
>
Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency.
W had us in Libya and Syria?
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful"
] |
>
I wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.
He chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.
The fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.
However the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?"
] |
>
As the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.
Let's be frank. "Black man in the White house" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.
The racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did."
] |
>
America was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong.
Then 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks.
But Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy.
Obama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911.
And immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward.
That call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything.
Obama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself.
But he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years."
] |
>
Aside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster.
What he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth.
History will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah."
] |
>
I think he'll be rated as one of worst
His performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus
His bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.
He completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed
Libya, which even agrees was a disaster.
Syria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.
Completely halfassed Afghanistan
Expanded the deadly drone war
Let Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.
Wasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.
Wasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)
The only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.
He was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years."
] |
>
His performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus
Biden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.
Also Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.
His bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.
Technically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.
Libya, which even agrees was a disaster.
Obama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support
Completely halfassed Afghanistan
Expanded the deadly drone war
So he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.
Let Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.
This has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.
Obama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.
Wasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.
Not his fault?
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth."
] |
>
So he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like "leading from behind" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?"
] |
>
I can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?"
] |
>
By who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades."
] |
>
For me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much."
] |
>
50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit."
] |
>
Commentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily."
] |
>
Hopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders."
] |
>
Depends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine.
Domestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.
ACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas."
] |
>
With the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill."
] |
>
It generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise.
Much like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!"
] |
>
I really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue."
] |
>
Despite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments."
] |
>
George Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?"
] |
>
I dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too."
] |
>
I think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.
From a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.
Then Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his "ending welfare as we know it."
I think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.
I think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes..."
] |
>
As a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell."
] |
>
A great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime."
] |
>
His foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.
From a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.
His status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat."
] |
>
Well his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant"
] |
>
Unfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons."
] |
>
Obama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.
Both presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama."
] |
>
Always so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all."
] |
>
He'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me."
] |
>
I think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not.
Basically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr."
] |
>
Probably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative"
] |
>
I do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out......."
] |
>
He served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan."
] |
>
Yeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably."
] |
>
No, it will get much, much, worse.
Obama broke many of the social norms around being President, and not for the better.
He's the first US president to remain in politics. He's the first "forever president". Every one of his predecessors stepped away from politics, and didn't meddle in the affairs of his successors
His weaponization of the Federal government took abusing power to a new level. Sure, Clinton had the IRS audit every woman who accused him of sexual impropriety. That pales next to Obama creating a fake russian narrative of Trump, and speading it to every agency in the Federal government. Or how about weaponizing the IRS to shut down PACs that align with your opponents, and then destroy the evidence?
History won't be kind to Obama. Deservedly so.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.",
">\n\nYeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one."
] |
>
He was arguably the worst President ever until Biden came along. When this whole idiotic Woke idea is dead, people will realize that Obama was a neo-Marxist anti-American not fit for any office and they had been duped by the media.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.",
">\n\nYeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one.",
">\n\nNo, it will get much, much, worse.\nObama broke many of the social norms around being President, and not for the better.\nHe's the first US president to remain in politics. He's the first \"forever president\". Every one of his predecessors stepped away from politics, and didn't meddle in the affairs of his successors\nHis weaponization of the Federal government took abusing power to a new level. Sure, Clinton had the IRS audit every woman who accused him of sexual impropriety. That pales next to Obama creating a fake russian narrative of Trump, and speading it to every agency in the Federal government. Or how about weaponizing the IRS to shut down PACs that align with your opponents, and then destroy the evidence?\nHistory won't be kind to Obama. Deservedly so."
] |
>
I have read no less than 1,000 books and many more scholarly articles studying both since 1978. I believe I have knowledge on the topic.
That said, it would be very boring for me to prove my understanding of both to you on a forum like this.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.",
">\n\nYeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one.",
">\n\nNo, it will get much, much, worse.\nObama broke many of the social norms around being President, and not for the better.\nHe's the first US president to remain in politics. He's the first \"forever president\". Every one of his predecessors stepped away from politics, and didn't meddle in the affairs of his successors\nHis weaponization of the Federal government took abusing power to a new level. Sure, Clinton had the IRS audit every woman who accused him of sexual impropriety. That pales next to Obama creating a fake russian narrative of Trump, and speading it to every agency in the Federal government. Or how about weaponizing the IRS to shut down PACs that align with your opponents, and then destroy the evidence?\nHistory won't be kind to Obama. Deservedly so.",
">\n\nHe was arguably the worst President ever until Biden came along. When this whole idiotic Woke idea is dead, people will realize that Obama was a neo-Marxist anti-American not fit for any office and they had been duped by the media."
] |
>
So then Professor, where was Obama arguing to establish collective ownership of the means of production and abolishment of commodities? And what distinguishes the neo from the paleo?
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.",
">\n\nYeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one.",
">\n\nNo, it will get much, much, worse.\nObama broke many of the social norms around being President, and not for the better.\nHe's the first US president to remain in politics. He's the first \"forever president\". Every one of his predecessors stepped away from politics, and didn't meddle in the affairs of his successors\nHis weaponization of the Federal government took abusing power to a new level. Sure, Clinton had the IRS audit every woman who accused him of sexual impropriety. That pales next to Obama creating a fake russian narrative of Trump, and speading it to every agency in the Federal government. Or how about weaponizing the IRS to shut down PACs that align with your opponents, and then destroy the evidence?\nHistory won't be kind to Obama. Deservedly so.",
">\n\nHe was arguably the worst President ever until Biden came along. When this whole idiotic Woke idea is dead, people will realize that Obama was a neo-Marxist anti-American not fit for any office and they had been duped by the media.",
">\n\nI have read no less than 1,000 books and many more scholarly articles studying both since 1978. I believe I have knowledge on the topic. \nThat said, it would be very boring for me to prove my understanding of both to you on a forum like this."
] |
>
As the truth comes out, he will be viewed as the second worst president, being that Biden is by far the worst and Carter coming in at number three.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.",
">\n\nYeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one.",
">\n\nNo, it will get much, much, worse.\nObama broke many of the social norms around being President, and not for the better.\nHe's the first US president to remain in politics. He's the first \"forever president\". Every one of his predecessors stepped away from politics, and didn't meddle in the affairs of his successors\nHis weaponization of the Federal government took abusing power to a new level. Sure, Clinton had the IRS audit every woman who accused him of sexual impropriety. That pales next to Obama creating a fake russian narrative of Trump, and speading it to every agency in the Federal government. Or how about weaponizing the IRS to shut down PACs that align with your opponents, and then destroy the evidence?\nHistory won't be kind to Obama. Deservedly so.",
">\n\nHe was arguably the worst President ever until Biden came along. When this whole idiotic Woke idea is dead, people will realize that Obama was a neo-Marxist anti-American not fit for any office and they had been duped by the media.",
">\n\nI have read no less than 1,000 books and many more scholarly articles studying both since 1978. I believe I have knowledge on the topic. \nThat said, it would be very boring for me to prove my understanding of both to you on a forum like this.",
">\n\nSo then Professor, where was Obama arguing to establish collective ownership of the means of production and abolishment of commodities? And what distinguishes the neo from the paleo?"
] |
>
I think it's fair for history to remember him as the nobel peace prize winner with the most confirmed civilian kills via ordered air strikes.
It both shows his accomplishments as well as his unearned media praise.
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.",
">\n\nYeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one.",
">\n\nNo, it will get much, much, worse.\nObama broke many of the social norms around being President, and not for the better.\nHe's the first US president to remain in politics. He's the first \"forever president\". Every one of his predecessors stepped away from politics, and didn't meddle in the affairs of his successors\nHis weaponization of the Federal government took abusing power to a new level. Sure, Clinton had the IRS audit every woman who accused him of sexual impropriety. That pales next to Obama creating a fake russian narrative of Trump, and speading it to every agency in the Federal government. Or how about weaponizing the IRS to shut down PACs that align with your opponents, and then destroy the evidence?\nHistory won't be kind to Obama. Deservedly so.",
">\n\nHe was arguably the worst President ever until Biden came along. When this whole idiotic Woke idea is dead, people will realize that Obama was a neo-Marxist anti-American not fit for any office and they had been duped by the media.",
">\n\nI have read no less than 1,000 books and many more scholarly articles studying both since 1978. I believe I have knowledge on the topic. \nThat said, it would be very boring for me to prove my understanding of both to you on a forum like this.",
">\n\nSo then Professor, where was Obama arguing to establish collective ownership of the means of production and abolishment of commodities? And what distinguishes the neo from the paleo?",
">\n\nAs the truth comes out, he will be viewed as the second worst president, being that Biden is by far the worst and Carter coming in at number three."
] |
>
Nope he will be looked upon, with doubts and questions, on why he did so little, for black people as the first Black president ,of the United states of America while passing bills for lmnopq people and everyone else, but nothing specifically for the well being of black people
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.",
">\n\nYeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one.",
">\n\nNo, it will get much, much, worse.\nObama broke many of the social norms around being President, and not for the better.\nHe's the first US president to remain in politics. He's the first \"forever president\". Every one of his predecessors stepped away from politics, and didn't meddle in the affairs of his successors\nHis weaponization of the Federal government took abusing power to a new level. Sure, Clinton had the IRS audit every woman who accused him of sexual impropriety. That pales next to Obama creating a fake russian narrative of Trump, and speading it to every agency in the Federal government. Or how about weaponizing the IRS to shut down PACs that align with your opponents, and then destroy the evidence?\nHistory won't be kind to Obama. Deservedly so.",
">\n\nHe was arguably the worst President ever until Biden came along. When this whole idiotic Woke idea is dead, people will realize that Obama was a neo-Marxist anti-American not fit for any office and they had been duped by the media.",
">\n\nI have read no less than 1,000 books and many more scholarly articles studying both since 1978. I believe I have knowledge on the topic. \nThat said, it would be very boring for me to prove my understanding of both to you on a forum like this.",
">\n\nSo then Professor, where was Obama arguing to establish collective ownership of the means of production and abolishment of commodities? And what distinguishes the neo from the paleo?",
">\n\nAs the truth comes out, he will be viewed as the second worst president, being that Biden is by far the worst and Carter coming in at number three.",
">\n\nI think it's fair for history to remember him as the nobel peace prize winner with the most confirmed civilian kills via ordered air strikes.\nIt both shows his accomplishments as well as his unearned media praise."
] |
>
|
[
"He'll be remembered for being the first non-white president and for chartering us out of a major recession plus the Affordable Care Act.\nMost of his foreign policy achievements were erased by Trump out of spite, but I think the defining foreign policy view will have been his reluctance to really stand up to Putin. \nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.",
">\n\n\nOverall, I think his legacy will be that of a good intentioned president who probably squandered a lot of political capital trying to appease an opposition party that was united against him.\n\nGot it right off the bat.\nMeant well, wasted his Presidency trying to placate people who wanted him dead - and that fetishizing of compromise paved the way for the nightmare that followed.",
">\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle. \nAnd then when they refuse to budge, the administration can paint them as rigid partisans. And afterwards, you can walk away and say, \"Everyone saw that we really tried to reach out to the opposing party, to no avail. We're going to do this our way, because we never got any input from them.\"\nObama wasn't good at manipulating his opposition. Bill Clinton was great at that! Obama also wasn't good at communicating his successes to the public. He requested and signed a tax cut bill, and made minimal effort to get credit for it.",
">\n\n\nThere's nothing wrong with looking for compromise. Compromise is a great place to start, and a great way to show independents that you made an effort to meet in the middle.\n\nI vehemently disagree. There absolutely is something wrong with looking for compromise.\nYou may accept compromise, you may settle for compromise, but if you start out with compromise as your goal from the outset, you've already lost. \nYou've said that whatever is it you want, you've already given up on getting it - and you've made your new definition of success dependent on your opponent cooperating with you, too.\nAnd that's how Obama wasted his entire Presidency.",
">\n\nI don’t completely agree. I’d like to find some middle ground with your comment, but I have a feeling you’re not one to compromise. 😀",
">\n\nI realize you're joking, but I encounter people who say what you're saying in perfect seriousness, and they genuinely baffle me.\nWhy on earth would anyone have a goal for themselves of not getting everything they want? \nYou're unlikely to get everything you want, sure, but what's the point of giving up before you even try? \nAnd why are such people always surprised that giving up doesn't yield great results? It's like watching someone start a race by shooting themself in the leg.",
">\n\nI’ll answer seriously now. \nIn the game of politics, in almost all cases, nobody gets everything they want.\nFor example, I am a libertarian. I want the federal government to stay out of social issues like abortion and marriage. I also want the federal budget drastically reduced (less on global wars and less on the “war on drugs”). Whether someone is a Republican or Democrat, they will likely agree with me on about half of the issues. \nWhat’s interesting is what I see with other libertarians. If my fellow libertarians and I imagine a desired future, we might agree on what it looks like. Let’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen. \nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat. Many of my fellow libertarians would never take that deal because they say it’s an increase to the budget rather than a 30% decrease. So, in this example, who is the more effective leader? If we don’t do the deal, then the budget will continue to grow by maybe 5% per year. A cap on growth is more pragmatic and more effective, in this example, than trying to hold the line on a position that will never materialize.",
">\n\n\nLet’s say a 30% reduction to the federal budget. Pragmatically, I realize that there is not enough support from Rs or Ds to ever let that happen.\nIf given a proposal that allows for 1% annual growth in the federal budget for the next 20 years, I’d agree to it in a heartbeat.\n\nBut can you not see how you started with the 30% and then were happy with the 1% you didn't like because it was less than something you disliked even more? You are doing exactly what you argue against.",
">\n\nAre you being serious or joking now? I never argued anything.\nI made a joke, saying that you seem like someone who doesn’t compromise. You followed up with a question. I provided an answer with an example.\nCompromise, by definition, is two parties accepting an outcome that is not entirely what either wants.",
">\n\nSeems we both fell for a case of mistaken identity.",
">\n\nI think so...\n-President's normally become more popular once they leave office and are no longer a source for controversy.\n-Unlike Bill Clinton, he never really had any major personal scandals which will weigh on his legacy\n-He became the first President to take major action on Gay Rights, and Gay Rights became a lot more popular once he left office. History seems to be on his side here. He also green-lighted the legalization of Marijuana in Blue States, passed Lily Ledbetter fair pay, implemented DACA, and appointed two solidly liberal SCOTUS justices.\n-The ACA is basically the law of the land now, the GOP has given up on trying to repeal it and more and more Red States are gradually adopting Medicare expansion. History seems to be on his side here too.\n-He navigated the US out of the Recession by passing the ARRA and additional stimulus. Dodd-Frank has been underrated effective despite being criticized by the Left and the Right. All this despite being opposed by a GOP which was willing to try to force a Default.\n-Foreign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy. He killed Bin Laden and withdrew most of our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. But he struggled to handle the fall out of the Arab Spring and achieve long term stability in the region. And he escalated the Drone War.\nI think hindsight is always kind of 50/50 in FP. For example, people blame him for not doing more against Putin, but forget the fact that Western Europe was largely disinterested once it seemed like Russia would stop at Crimea and Donbass, and that Obama's sanctions did provoke a currency crisis and recession in Russia, and the threat of another currency crisis led Russia to spend years building up their foreign reserves before resuming the war. To what extent are future events Obama's fault, or was he simply doing the best managing the situation at hand?\nPersonally, I would probably put him in the upper third of American Presidents. He moved the US in a liberal direction on social issues which have become more popular with the public since he's left office, passed the ACA which has also become more popular since he left office, and navigated out of the recession better than most European countries.",
">\n\n\nForeign Policy will likely be the most controversial part of Obama's legacy\n\nIt's interesting that his objectively largest foreign policy success, the Iran nuclear deal, almost never gets mentioned. It's likely because Trump ripped it up, but it was a clear mechanism to reduce nuclear danger in the middle east for at least a decade and should be looked back at as a success.",
">\n\nIt's always hard to tell when you're not far removed from it, but on the whole I think he'll be viewed favorably. Not many scandals to speak of, decent stewardship of the government and economy, nice bounceback from the 2008 crash. His lows weren't very low, but on the opposite of that his highs weren't very high. He had one big piece of legislation early in his administration and even that is still being judged. He was a stable, even handed, stoic, and rational leader, but he also seemed to lack to will to swing for the fence or take any kind of risk. And outside of the Bin Laden raid he really didn't make many great decisions when it came to defense. \nBut it's still entirely too soon to trot out the rankings. My personal line is 50 years. You can't judge presidential rankings by the standards of your own time. People thought Reagan was the shit after he left but that facade is already starting to show some cracks, and even his time in office was less than stellar. There's also the \"Jimmy Carter\" effect where a presidents time after leaving office changes your stance on their presidency. Carters administration was a disaster, but he's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too. \nYou can also look at someone like JFK that was heavily praised after his assassination, but closer scrutiny of his administration shows that things were actually pretty dysfunctional behind the scenes and a lot of bad policy was enacted. Time gives the ability to fairly judge.",
">\n\n\nhe's done so much good after leaving office that people think more of him now than they did when he left. We're starting to see that a little bit with W., too.\n\nWait, what? What has Dubya done since leaving office to rehabilitate his image besides take up painting and pointing to the next Republican and saying, \"Hey, at least I'm not this asshole, right?\"",
">\n\nHis policy center regularly hosts free events advocating for education and women's health, he's a huge fundraiser for veterans causes, and he makes regular trips to Africa to raise awareness about cervical cancer. \nListen, he's not my favorite. But that's why I have the 50 year rule.",
">\n\nHis...what?\nLooking it up, I see it's some component of his Presidential library. I've studied politics to an unhealthy degree for decades and I've never heard of it before. The general public isn't even aware it exists, so clearly it isn't rehabilitating his image.",
">\n\nPink Ribbon Red Ribbon is an awesome initiative he put forward. Acts as a counter punch with PEPFAR another one of his Presidental initiatives. It is a fight against cervical cancer. As Women with Aids are 5x more likely to get cervical cancer. So I remember a comment he made - which goes something like - \"we get these women the help they needed with aids, but we lose the fight to cancer\". You don't see it much as - it isn't focused in the US. He does a similar thing with his 2018 GO FURTHER initiative which (like PRRR) partners directly with PEPFAR and the UN. Something like 6 million Cervical Cancer Screenings and like 250,000 treatments have been done for women with HIV or AIDS. \n\nIt is an African project and the American public really doesn't give a crap about what happens in Africa. I really wish Obama listened to Bush specifically on Africa. As the point of how you really fight extremism like Boko Haram is by investing in Africa and not bombing it- which I know is ironic. But, he goes over to Africa a ton. Still does a lot of drives and Press for PEPFAR. Like during the 2014 US -African leaders summit - the Bush institute held an all day long presentation to the spouses of the leaders - the point of the presentations were health care changes they could tell their husbands about. It was a smart idea. \nWhile not the best President and I say that liberally. He hasn't been just sitting on his butt painting. His institute does some really amazing stuff - it just needs better press.",
">\n\nHim in Washington in December on World AID day, it's a good talk. He only really comes to Washington to talk about Aids and Aids related programs. Just to make sure those policies continue. \nIt is honestly endearing.",
">\n\nACA is a big dog achievement. Has helped so many people including myself afford healthcare.",
">\n\nI think that many people have blanked out how bad insurance used to be. Like how you could be denied health insurance for having an illness diagnosed before getting on insurance. So if you get diagnosed with something scary you might never get insurance again. At least until the ACA.",
">\n\nI know for a fact that my father stayed with the same employer he had since before I was born, not out of loyalty, but because he had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\nMy dad's employer knew it, too, and they forced him (and the rest of his family) to move to entirely different states no fewer than three times during his career.",
">\n\n\nhe had heart issues and wouldn't be able to be insured if he switched jobs.\n\nthat's not how it worked. you could switch jobs with a pre-existing condition. You just couldn't be uninsured for a period of time and then try to get insurance.",
">\n\nBefore the ACA, most health insurance plans explicitly excluded coverage for pre-existing conditions. That means if my dad had ever left his job, he wouldn't be able to get coverage for his heart condition. That was the fact of his life his entire career, and he retired a few years before the ACA passed.\nI am gobsmacked by the sheer fucking arrogance to not only tell me that my own direct lived history is wrong, but to base it on incorrect assumptions as well.",
">\n\nAnd there was nothing in HIPAA preventing insurance companies from charging you out the ass for preexisting conditions if you changed providers, which was one of the big reforms in the ACA. If my dad had switched providers, he would have been unable to afford healthcare because of the rate increases.\nI'm really not interested in trying to dig up old articles and speeches to prove my point to someone who decided that my own fucking lived experience was invalid because they didn't understand how health insurance worked pre-ACA so I'm done replying.",
">\n\nif you're in an employee plan, you pay/paid the same rate as all the other employees. have you ever heard of a job where each employee was paying a different rate for the same medical coverage?\nYou can keep talking about \"lived experience\" (despite the fact that it was your dad that dealt with the insurance, not you), but everyone who had a job at that time had the same lived experience, including me. and you're simply wrong about this.",
">\n\nOverall I think Obama will be remembered as a mid to high mid tier president. I’ve looked at a bunch of different Presidential ranking surveys, and most seem to agree.\nObviously he’ll largely be remembered as the first African-American President, but in terms of matters that are actually relevant, he’ll be remembered for the ACA fs, and also what went on with Afghanistan, the end of the Iraq War, Isis, and the Russian invasion of Crimea.\nSo yea, if I had to try and be as neutral as possible, I think he’ll be remembered as a top 15 president.",
">\n\n\nbut in terms of matters that are actually relevant\n\nI disagree here. I think his race alone was/is historic, and for that reason alone, he will remain as a well-remembered president in American history. Race played a big role in the 2010s, especially on topics like police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests, which exploded during this time due to everyone suddenly having a phone with a camera and internet.\nObviously his other stuff is important, but 50-100 years in the future, I don't think people will remember a healthcare bill passed in 2009 or what happened in Afghanistan in 2011. But they will remember who the first Black president was.",
">\n\nLike I said, part of his legacy will obviously be being the first African-American President, but we’re also poised to have a political leaders from minority groups in the future, so I doubt that will be that big a deal say thirty or fifty years from now, and certainly wouldn’t be enough of a reason alone to keep him in good memories historically speaking.\nThat being said, as I said before, in light of his actual accomplishments and what occurred during his two terms in office, he’s likely to be remembered decently. The ACA qualifies as an accomplishment, despite it not being supported by ~50% of Americans, people will remember that as an example of Obama doing something.\nBut most of all, by far, I believe Obama will be remembered for his role in foreign policy, particularly that of the Middle East. He oversaw the end of the Iraq War, the rise of Isis, and the fight against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. He may have achieved mixed results in those regards, but he’ll still definitely be remembered for those events mainly, because to put it plainly, they’re the most significant.\nAs for police brutality and the rise of BLM, most events in that regard occurred late in Trump’s term. Trump was elected mainly due to dissatisfaction with the ruling establishment in the mid-2010s, sort of the runoff of the Tea Party movement. Racial tensions played little to no role in his Presidency until 2020.\nThat being said, Trump is unlikely to be remembered fondly by historians, (unless he somehow gets re-elected in 2024 Grover Cleveland style and turns it around). I try to be as politically neutral as possible with my reasoning, but for obvious reasons Trump will be remembered poorly, that’s kind of just a fact. Honestly I doubt in thirty or fifty years many people will remember much about him besides Jan 6/the election plus tweets.",
">\n\nI think Obama, in 50-100 years will be considered a Great President. He overcame few hurdles any previous president even faced. Never mind manage the country through the Great Recession without a single scandal.\nObama, in my opinion, is one of the “cleanest” presidents we’ve ever had. In my view, Obama was the least corrupt president in the post war period.\nNo, I am not one of those people who blames Obama for what followed. Because the only people responsible for what followed where those who did what they did. I’m not a big fan of “you made me feel this way so I did this super shitty thing to people therefor it’s your fault” weak minded propaganda.",
">\n\nThe only cleaner post war one was Carter. I think Obama’s true legacy is that he was an adequately effective politician and competent executive without being a scumbag. It doesn’t sound like much, but judging by the rest field it must be pretty difficult.",
">\n\nI live in Atlanta, and Barack Obama is (not surprisingly) almost immortal here. Tire shops, diners, gas stations have framed photos of him and Michelle on their wall and good luck to whomever decides to take those photos down. Uber drivers have his photo on their dash. I was at an estate sale the other day and the person who passed had a 10 ft x 16 ft painting commission done of the Obamas and it was in their living room.\nI am not Black, but I don't think it's quite possible to overstate the impact of a black president for so many African Americans. Give the farm teams of both parties, it's probably likely to say outside of an unpredictable event (ie. Biden dying), we probably will not see another Black president for a while. \nNow obviously you don't have to go very far north in Georgia is see a lot of Trump love, but even that is waning, and soon those folks will be on to the next thing.\nI think Obama's legacy will live on for a very long time.",
">\n\nYou’re noting Obama and Trump voters as two completely separate entities which they are not. They never ran against each other, and it’s likely that millions of people who voted for Obama later voted for Trump. I think one of the best sources for OPs question would come from some of these Obama-to-Trump voters, their reasons for doing so and the thought-processes behind it.",
">\n\nThat is only true in some areas (ie. Philly). It is statistically not true in Atlanta.",
">\n\nObama is extremely charismatic and intelligent, which definitely helps his current popularity. Future generations will just judge him based on achievements, so I think his popularity will decline on that alone.",
">\n\nAs a few others have said, I think from a policy and political standpoint he'll be remembered as a stable but ineffectual leader who basically didn't rock the boat.\nMore than that though, I think he'll be remembered for the immense social change that occurred during his administration. Marijuana, homosexuality, and many more things became widely accepted or legalized during this time. I think people will view Obama's presidency as one of great social progress but political stagnation.",
">\n\nDidn’t rock the boat? Republicans tuned their entire identity to “abolishing Obamacare.” I think people don’t really understand how radical most people in the country think Obama was.",
">\n\nI think he will likely be downgraded as time goes on for his tendency to be overly moderate, wasting political capital, continuing many foreign policy mistakes, and not doing anything to shore up American democracy. \nTo begin, I think all sides of the equation are rightfully increasingly dismissive of the game of moderate compromise politics he traded in. Many other posters have mentioned the ACA as a major political victory of his but even at the time people were frustrated at how much energy he wasted getting through a watered down proposal that was frankly not enough to deal with America’s healthcare crisis. Similarly, he’ll be remembered for not protecting Roe v Wade and being not nearly supportive enough on civil rights issues like the early BLM and gay rights movements. So amongst his main group of supporters the general tendency leftward in recent years indicates he’ll likely be perceived as too moderate and truly wasting the super majority he had.\nOn Foreign Policy, you have a continuation of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, a hawkish attitude on Libya, Syria and Yemen, massive drone strike campaigns, and his general poor handling of Putin. There’s also his support for unpopular trade deals in the Pacific and with NAFTA. In many ways, he was a more competent continuation of the American standard foreign policy that came from Clinton and Bush. This foreign policy consensus has clearly fallen apart in key aspects, Afghanistan was a massive mistake, Iraq is a mess as always, Libya is in an on and off civil war with open air slave markets, Syria and Yemen continue to be the worst modern humanitarian disasters in recent memory, and he couldn’t decide if he wanted to take a strong stand with Putin or coordinate for deescalation.\nFinally, there’s just the general fact that this period will likely be remembered as an explosive and key turning point for America. The country is significantly shifting with both sides recognizing the failures of the neoliberal status quo, and Obama was really the last president who wasn’t a product of the new ideological clash. The fact that his Democratic Party backed a worthless candidate in 2016 will be judged harshly. The fact that he didn’t fight harder against the trump administration will be judged harshly. Him sticking to norms while republicans consistently didn’t will be judged harshly. \nI remember in 2016, Michelle Obama said “when they go low we go high” at that point it seemed like a good positive note. Now it seems part and parcel with the democrats failures in the modern era. They went high and their enemies went low, but a moral high ground won’t matter when abortions banned.",
">\n\nObama era was a wasted opportunity, but nobody really understood how badly republicans would react.\nMostly agree with this. Ive been trying to get Democrats to be way more aggressive with weaponizing the debt ceiling, such as threatening to exit the federal reserve system, because Republicans have no way out of it unless Democrats give them one.\nThe Republicans only power in any occasion is the power Democrats give them since the entire federal credit rating is based on tax dollars that flow from blue states.\nWithout Democratic leaning states paying the nations bills, the Republican party would simply be another confederacy and would quickly devolve into the 'trashy states of America'. Those states would quickly rip themselves apart.",
">\n\nWas he windsurfing or para-sailing during the first weekend of the Trump presidency when the country was protesting the Muslim ban?",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered as the last decent President before America lost its damn mind.",
">\n\nYep. Remember his and McCain ruining against each other? McCain was on the trial defending Obama as a good man, Obama was calling him a war hero. Both were honorable. It’s insane that was only 15 years ago. We live in a different country now.",
">\n\nIf they actually were talking good about each other in their presidential debate that's quite heartwarming , trump vs Clinton and trump vs biden speeches were complete shitshows with both of them just trashing each other",
">\n\nSee if you can look up some old news videos. Sure, both sides had their differences and did a lot of mudslinging, but Obama, McCain, and even Romney all showed mutual respect for each other. They'll shit talk each other during the campaign to some degree, but they were all mostly good to each other and defended each other's character when someone went too far, McCain especially.\n... That level of political respect basically evaporated the moment Trump announced his candidacy.",
">\n\nI think Obama will rated as a middle of the road, maybe a little higher. He was an effective president and will be rated as so. But he will be downgraded because his ceiling was so high. And frankly a once in a generation talent politician, a very effective organizer of his coalition plus being the first Black President, he should have been more effective. Time will tell, but on paper he should have accomplished a hell of a lot more.",
">\n\nObama will be remembered positively going forward. His presidency led us out of the horrible financial crisis of the Bush presidency. When he left office the economy was booming in which Trump rode his coattails for the first 18 months of his presidency.\nThe US was respected around the world. He formed numerous partnerships and joined numerous treaties that left our Country in a stronger standing than before his presidency. \nThere should have been an investigation of W Bush for his lies about starting the Iraq war. If crimes were committed then there should have been lengthy jail sentences handed down. Instead, there were no investigations or hearings to determine what really happened.\nHis term was sandwiched between the worse two POTUSs of modern history. So he will be remembered in a more positive light for that reason as well.",
">\n\nObama will be viewed as the first victim of open Republican obstructionism and anti-American activity.",
">\n\nI believe Obama will be viewed similarly as Lyndon Johnson. \nFor his domestic triumphs and his foreign policy disappointments but not to the extent that Johnson was with Vietnam.\nDomestically he will be viewed as navigating an incredible recovery to the Great Recession, the ACA, he will be credited with the social changes to gay marriage and the expansion of rights, the removal of troops from Iraq, Dodd-Frank, the President who got Bin Laden, and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.\nHowever certain failures will loom as time goes on. His weak positions on Syria, the Arab Spring and Russian invasions of Ukraine in 2014. His failures to clamp down on corruption in Afghanistan, and domestically his inability to get any kind of reasonable reform in the aftermath of Sandy Hook. \nOverall I believe he will be positioned highly as he never really had a “scandal” that was actually serious. The only one that truly was was the drug gun bust and even then that was minor.\nTo me, he is the millennial generation’s JFK if JFK wasn’t assassinated.\nWill he be top 3? No, will he be top 5? Maybe? Will he be top 10 certainly.",
">\n\nHard to say. \nOftentimes the policies and decisions made by presidents take time to flesh out.",
">\n\nDepends on by who. Liberals will continue to look back on his presidency as a golden age, the last time that politics felt like what they think he should be. The trend for left leaning people has been to view him worse and worse as time goes on, from well-meaning but thwarted to inept and self-obsessed, and that will probably intensify. As far as I can tell the right has actually softened on him though, or at least they just care about him less, he still hasn't spawned anything like the conspiracy theories that have surrounded the Clinton and Biden families.",
">\n\nWho remembers Obama's era as a golden age? I like the guy but the years he was president really weren't great, and politics has been getting way too divisive for years even before Obama was elected.",
">\n\nyeah i guess not so much the era but for some people him and his administration are still the ideal",
">\n\nHow has not a single comment mentioned climate change yet? It is by far the most important event of our time and will have widespread impacts for decades to come. If Obama is even remembered at all he will be judged by what he did (more accurately didn't do) to address the environmental and humanitarian catastrophe that he knew would be coming a few decades after his presidency. He decided to kick the can further down the road, and for that he will be judged as a failure and lumped together with other contemporary world leaders in that regard when viewed from a historical context.",
">\n\nObama's ARRA included massive investments in green energy. He helped negotiate the Paris accord.",
">\n\nIdk. Part of me feels like he’s been viewed more negatively as not doing enough in his time in office. Hell, some see Trump winning the presidency as a part of Obama’s legacy. Idk.",
">\n\nI hope he's more accurately remembered as the drone strike president who chose to keep for-profit health insurance thriving while claiming that he didn't have enough to institute universal care. The poster boi of virtue signaling who was a conservative in progressives' clothing.",
">\n\nI think internally - at some point we're going to acknowledge this period in history where the United States used drones to achieve supremacy as a pre-cursor to something worse.\nAt which point Obama will be remembered and acknowledged for his very active hand in that.\nEven 10 years out from 9/11, we were still hitting groups of people, none of which had been tried for crimes, some of which who were just children, with hellfire missiles.\nAnd we were okay because it wasn't happening here.\nAnd we really didn't have to look at it.\nAnd we were told it kept us safe.\nAnd we shouldn't focus on the Assassination Baseball Cards.\nAnd we should be happy we didn't risk American lives.\nBut we're at the start of the end of it right? We've pulled out of both major wars. We're drawing down our forces in the regions. \nThe consequences have been felt (The rise of ISIS out of the Iraq Invasion), 200,000 excess deaths in Iraq alone. Trillion dollar budget holes because both parties were terrified to reign in the Pentagon.\nAnd they will continue to be felt in the region, by our vets at home, and when people look to the sky.",
">\n\nNot only did he mess up his health care initiative, but he turned his back on the financial crisis’ impact on ordinary people, as soon as the banks were stabilized. I remember how physically stunned I was to hear that AIG had been bailed out with no pain to them; Paulson seeming jovial in making his announcement of his solution; Obama summoning the heads of the 3 major banks to meet with him in DC, and their all telling him they had schedule conflicts. I had figured that although”hope and change” was a slogan that brought with it radical responsibilities, he couldn’t possibly have used it as mere cynical advertising, but he showed no memory of it or obligation to it. Even in his brief gig as a community organizer, people there said he had just been checking a box on his resume. So interesting that both Clinton and Obama, who knew somewhat hard economic circumstances growing up, were so oblivious once in power.",
">\n\nHe’s viewed fairly positively now I’d say, especially given that both his predecessor and successor were among the worst we’ve ever had.\nPersonally I would likely put him in the top 15, but 10th best is pushing it IMO. He left the country a lot better than he found it, but fell significantly short of his potential.",
">\n\nNo. Obama had a Super Majority for 7 months in the 111th Congress and did nothing to Codify Roe v. Wade or Gun Control or get rid of the Filibuster. Obama dropped 10 drone bombs a day for 8 years on innocent Mid East Folks killing hundreds of thousands of them only to secure massive Profits for War Contractors. Then there is the bailout of The Banks and GM while leaving homeowners high and dry with foreclosures and no relief. Then allowing Banks to buy back the foreclosed homes they chose at pennies on the dollar only to reap in Billions. Obama drastically increased Military Spending. Obama also created Obamacare instead of M4A, you know who wrote the bill? Right Health Care Insurance Lobbyists, it is only good for you if you have over $30,000 in medical bills a year. If you are healthy enough to have only $15,000 in Medical Bills you are subsidizing the sick people instead of the actual profits of the Health Care Insurance Industry, letting it avoid its financial responsibility. And Damn, I forgot about his visit to Flint MI.",
">\n\nA more honest assessment by future historians will downgrade him significantly. (I speak as one who avidly supported his candidacy in 2008.)",
">\n\nTwo terms of Bush made his oratory skills shine.",
">\n\nAnd everyone since him as well.",
">\n\nI'll take classic bushisms over trump every day of the week. I can show my kids bushisms and have a good hearted laugh. While Trump ... I couldn't.",
">\n\nI doubt it. He is pretty emblematic of many of the frustrations people have with the Democratic Party.",
">\n\nGenerally yes, and he'll keep improving. I say generally, because we need to keep the Country sane. If lunacy takes hold and voter apathy continues, anything Democrat could become toxic",
">\n\nIt all depends how the next few decades go.\nIf our democracy survives, Obama's historical image will probably not change much. Broke a major barrier, magnificent speaker, accomplished a few things, but far, far short of what he could have.\nIf it doesn't, Fatherland America will teach schoolchildren that he was the embodiment of Satan whose appearance forced brave white Americans to finally stand up and end this degenerate, impure \"democracy\" business.",
">\n\nIt depends. If republicans manage to go full on fascism and overturn fair elections he will be charged in a circus of a trial and convicted of some crime. History books will be rewritten to show their lies as the truth.",
">\n\nI'm personally kind of disappointed with how all of the ex presidents have handled all recent events, especially Obama though because a lot of people would listen to Obama. \nLike he's not president, he can't be, but, he could endorse somebody, he could speak out, make speeches go on talk shows. He could have done a lot.\nAnd I know he's not president, but still. This is bigger than that, imo. \nLike we need like a positive motivator. Like MLK. \nThe BLM people were just hooligans, and we have sort of nobody, except Zelensky, but he's more just fighting a war. \nWe need somebody that motivates people to be positive, and do positive things. And help each other. Be like a team. Care about each other. Help each other. Work for each other. Protect each other. And we need a leader that can fight for democracy, that can fight for the good things. And call out the tyrants, and create massive momentum, not just because they are the best option that isn't a tyrant, but because they fight for important values, and they are going make the country great again. We need the light side of the Maga.",
">\n\nIt simply depends on whose view you think is relevant. Conservatives will never view any Democrat positively as their only goal is to demonize the brand.",
">\n\nAs a milque toast neoliberal that bailed out wallstreet and passed a right wing health care plan that was a give away to private insurance companies",
">\n\nHe got a health care plan passed though. Considering how Republicans reacted to ACA you’d think Obama tried to clone Lenin and Stalin. Are you from another dimension? I wish our right wing would have proposed the ACA. Aka “Obamacare”",
">\n\nLiterally one of the most ineffective Presidents in modern history. Also one of the most disappointing; promised much, delivered zero (he talked up the ACA like it would be Medicare-esque, but at the end of the day, Obamacare was a money payout to insurance companies). He bombed hospitals and weddings in Syria, refuelled the Saudis so they could keep up their genocide of Yemen, enabled apartheid in Palestine and was an all round horrific person.\nSo basically, an average President.",
">\n\nObama's legacy will stay largely stay the same as it is today. As time goes on he's being seen less and less as a prominent figure in politics and more and more as a neutral historical figure, and because of this there will be less people who hate him and want to vilify him and less people who love him and want to paint him as a saint. I would argue that people now have a decent grasp of his achievements and shortcomings, and I don't think that will change too much over time. Obama will be remembered for being the first black president first and foremost, followed by being a mediocre president who did some good, some bad, and a lot of meh.",
">\n\nI think opinion ought to turn against him because his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the financial crisis was unjust and his failure to prosecute anyone responsible for the Iraq war is basically responsible for Trump winning the presidency (because Hillary is going to be around to lose the election if she's been prosecuted along with everyone else who voted to allow the Iraq war).",
">\n\nHe’ll definitely be remembered as the last decent president. Not decent policy wise (I’m not getting into that here), but civility wise. I wish American politics would get back to what it was in 2008 and ‘12 and out of this new populist era where we’re constantly on the brink of civil war.",
">\n\nHow is Biden not decent in the way you are using it?",
">\n\nBecause back then both parties would at least be civil. Nowadays it’s just polarization and Democrats wanting to negotiate with a rogue party.",
">\n\nAbsolutely.\nLet me paint you a picture.\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\nObama turned USA into an Orville state.\nBut history will view him as better.",
">\n\n\nThink back to Bush Jr.\nHe wasn't so bad now was he?\nYes he was. But when compared to Trump he was pure Einstein.\n\nTo be fair, the M.O. of Republicans is to always keep digging, so the horrors of the past appear mild, even desirable, in comparison.\nOur last President made Nixon seem brave and principled. Nixon, who once terrified the Secret Service by walking into the Lincoln Memorial occupied with antiwar protesters and just sitting and talking with them for over an hour. No security, no alarms, just him sitting alone with a group of people who hated him while the Secret Service sweated outside.\nHe was, of course, also a lunatic who terrified his own Cabinet to the point the Secretary of Defense once had to make plans in case he attempted a self-coup.\nBut compared to the guy who killed a million Americans and ran and hid in his underground nuclear bunker at the sight of Americans exercising their Constitutional rights of free speech and protest, he doesn't seem so bad anymore, does he?",
">\n\nWhen Obama and his wife celebrated their victory achieving the nomination with a fist bump, Fox News reported it as a \"terrorist fist jab.\" Upon his election as President, Mitch McConnell announced that it would be the sole task of Republican legislators to deny Obama a second term.\nNo president in history, not even Lincoln, began a presidency with such aggressive willingness to sacrifice American interests in order to destroy that presidency.\nDespite that reality, Obama drove his administration to attempt to work with Republicans and opposed any Congressional effort to attack Republicans with hearings and investigations of previous administration malfeasance. This failure of party leadership led to a distant relationship with Congressional Democratic leadership and a mediocre legislative record for Obama's administration.\nThis is his legacy: naive and foolish. His being the first Black president will, from the future's point of view, be more an embarrassment that that had been an issue at the time, rather than any celebration of the event.\nThe second/third paragraph of his legacy will include reasonably high marks for his first-baby-step awkward achievement in advancing health care and he will be recognized as a great president in eloquently expressing American ideals and for his grace and (relative) popularity, with no subsequent president achieving his level of popularity for decades.",
">\n\nObama would be in his fourth term right now if there were no term limits, and we would be better off because of it.",
">\n\n10th best of all time? \nI guess history is written by those who win and if those who are winning today, win in the future I guess it wouldn’t change that much.",
">\n\n10 is too high, but a lot of presidents have been very ineffectual. Especially in the lead up to the Civil War and the late 19th century Gilded Age. That’s not even getting into truly bad ones like Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Hoover, and Trump (I know it hasn’t been 20 years, but attempting to overturn an election he lost automatically tanks him).",
">\n\nDoubt it. HE did nothing when Mitch stole a SCOTUS seat. HE wasted 2 full years passing the ACA with bilateral support because he wanted so badly to reach across th isle that he let the GOP move the goalposts over and over. HE never did anything about Guantanamo after talking about it, including giving AnY. Information about why he did nothing.\nHE did a lot. But honestly, he did kinda very little at the same time. And SHOULD have done much more.",
">\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat? \nHe couldn’t jump over Congress and order the Supreme court to accept his choice of justice.",
">\n\n\nWhat was he supposed to have done on the SCOTUS seat?\n\nChallenged the Senate on the \"advice and consent\" clause. If the Senate is silent, then consent can be presumed. He never even tried the argument bc he assumed Hilary would win.",
">\n\nDude, don't offer opinions on you've you clearly know nothing about.",
">\n\nAs more and more comes out about Yemen and other operations, my opinion is that he will slowly decline even further like he has over the last 6 years. His biggest upwards movement in “positivity” was around OBL’s death. \nHonestly there was much special about him other than his race and being the first to that seat.",
">\n\nIt was 3rd & 4th Bush terms. Policy differences were very few, specially when it came to foreign policy. He might as well have been just another old white guy. False hope is how he should accurately be remembered. At the time, I fell for it. Now it’s pretty obvious that his presidency was only superficially different from W’s.",
">\n\nThis seems pretty disingenuous. Obama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. Obama AT LEAST delivered ACA. I’m not saying Obama was some magnificent president but he got us through a ridiculous recession and passed good legislation. \nW would have been incapable of any of that so that comparison is awful",
">\n\n\nObama continued W’s wars but W was the one who put us there in the first place and was war hawk pretty much his whole presidency. \n\nW had us in Libya and Syria?",
">\n\nI wouldn't say MORE positively, because he still kinda is. I think he'll be viewed in a similar light as Bill Clinton who also left office with an approval rating of around 60%. A lot of us will view Obama's era as a period of relative stability, but also a major transformation.\nHe chugged healthcare reform through a congress that approved it with a party line vote. However when it was the moment of truth of whether to gut it, three senators that voted no on the ACA bill decided to oppose its repeal. He was against the ACA but he had the sense to understand that healthcare reform was needed, along with Murkowski and Collins, and knew that the measures intended to replace it would set us way back.\nThe fact that Obama, along with the Senate and House Democrats, were able to create such a transformative bill that has withstood court challenges is absolutely remarkable.\nHowever the main issue with Obama was the fact that he gave the Republicans too much benefit of the doubt. Had he been more aggressive with calls to reform or even abolish the filibuster, we would have seen better outcomes with passing important legislation today. It was clear from day 1 that the GOP wanted Obama to be a one term president even tho Obama did nothing to warrant that. If he stopped wanting to compromise with them and started playing hardball, he would have seen that the Republicans only cared about opposing anything he did.",
">\n\nAs the generation of racists that were alive during the Obama terms begin to die off, yes, I believe he will be viewed far more positively over the next few decades.\nLet's be frank. \"Black man in the White house\" was one of the most polarizing events in recent US history. You could argue it is what spawned the Trump years, MAGA, Qanon etc via the birth certificate controversy.\nThe racist, wrapped in the American flag crowd never moderated over the years.",
">\n\nAmerica was in a weird place in the GWB years. Bush won because a partisan Supreme Court voted to stop counting votes in Florida. Bush was an incredible nitwit not long after a VP candidate was mocked for spelling potato wrong. \nThen 911 happened. And the country just coalesced around Bush. Trust the president, people said. Watch newscasts from that time. You were in, or you were not. Maxine Waters, Dixie Chicks. \nBut Bush pushed that far. Lying, torturing like 24, misleading. Swift Boat. Citizen's United. Curring taxes, and blowing up the economy. \nObama came in on a wave of resentment that America was misled for trusting W to move on from 911. \nAnd immediately, he said it was important to look forward not backward. Imagine if that happened in the courts? Judge, my client and I think it is important to look forward, not backward. \nThat call became the justification for Trump. Fuck it, you can do anything. \nObama did some good things, the ACA is goodish. He helped the non-racist parts of America feel more proud of itself. \nBut he fucked up that part. America will never be the same because no president will be held to accord anymore. GWB committed war crimes. Now he paints pictures and chums with Oprah.",
">\n\nAside from the racial aspect, not much distinguishes Obama, certainly not legislation. The health care reform is about it but the Democrats universally now call for yet more government control so they obviously don’t like it, as in it is deficient. Republicans disliked it as a power grab, with too much control and a budget buster. \nWhat he’ll be known for is what he did behind the scenes, politicizing the military, the federal bureaucracy, and feeding ideology into the Establishment, driving the media and academia even further left. That erupted when he was replaced by Trump, and it has set off a major escalation in the divisions that bleed the country. We’ve seen Biden as the Obama 3rd term, but it is deeply unpopular and hurting the country. It will not be followed by a fourth. \nHistory will be written about this, but an honest accounting won’t happen for a century. The leftist slant in history Departments wont allow an accurate analysis of his 8 years.",
">\n\nI think he'll be rated as one of worst\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\n\nHe completely let China's economic growth unchecked, rampant IP theft, buying US and other Western companies left and right, believed Xi's lie about the artificial Islands, and his only response was the TPP which failed\n\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\n\nSyria, which not only was an amateur disaster in terms of cost to Syrian people, but launched a massive right wing resurgence in Europe due to terrorism and refugees.\n\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan \n\n\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\n\nWasted political capital raising taxes when unemployment was still high(wtf?)\n\n\nThe only thing he did that I'd rate goodish on is Obamacare care, and even that was medicore.\nHe was a good person, but a terrible president. Completely out of his depth.",
">\n\n\nHis performance in the 2008 financial crisis was beyond terrible. The idea that liberal can call 9.8% unemployment during your midterm a success is mindblowing. Biden managed to get it down to 3.5% with properly sized stimulus\n\nBiden took office with unemployment at 6.5%, and their were different structural problems with the post-recession economy compared to the post-COVID economy.\nAlso Biden's recovery saw very high inflation.\n\nHis bailout of Wall Street was terrible. His bailed out Wall Street instead of Main Street, leading a decade mediocre growth.\n\nTechnically Bush signed TARP not Obama. But if you want to see what a full on financial collapse looks like read about the Great Depression. Saving the financial industry was the correct move.\n\nLibya, which even agrees was a disaster.\n\nObama did not create the Libyan crisis, but he attempted to enforce the UN line of a no fly zone. Permanently deploying US troops lacked domestic support\n\nCompletely halfassed Afghanistan\nExpanded the deadly drone war\n\nSo he was supposed to intervene more to save the flailing Afghanistan War, but intervene less by reducing the drone war? That seems kind of incoherent.\n\nLet Russia walk over Ukraine, with weak sanctions, and refusing to give the Ukrainians lethal military aid.\n\nThis has become a talking point recently, but is mostly wrong. US led sanctions provoked a currency crisis and sent the Russian economy into a recession. Some reports indicate that the Western response tempered Putin's ambitions to just the Donbas. But regardless, Russia spent years building up its foreign reserves so that it could defend its currency if it invaded again.\nObama was willing to go further and consider a possible SWIFT ejection. But European leaders balked.\n\nWasted his political capital on Iran deal that got undone by his successor.\n\nNot his fault?",
">\n\nSo he out performed all presidents since FDR with his Lincolnesque oratory. I feel like he was really pranking us when he started saying stuff like \"leading from behind\" and other such nonsense phrases. He did have a great long forefinger, but why was it always wagging at us?",
">\n\nI can’t reply directly to the mod but I don’t think it’s low quality content. Illinois already has a state holiday for him. I think this short and simple assumption speaks magnitudes on how I think he’ll be viewed in the coming decades.",
">\n\nBy who? Most of the media and the sycophants that look forward to slurping down every overly ridiculous accolade, yes. The ones who ignore that crap and loathe his ongoing tenure, not so much.",
">\n\nFor me he will always be remembered as the biggest letdown of my generation. I thought there was HOPE, but was left with the same neo-lib bullshit.",
">\n\n50 years from now when people no longer care about him being the 1st black president his ranking will drop heavily.",
">\n\nCommentators on the left already rank Biden over Obama, for his attempt at student loan forgiveness and pardoning non violent marijuana offenders.",
">\n\nHopefully as the man who get more whistle-blowers prosecuted under the Patriot Act than anyone else, the man who ordered the extrajudicial assassination of two American citizens, the man who got America into FOUR wars, and the man who helped sell America's manufacturing base out overseas.",
">\n\nDepends strongly on the person. For me? Less. He was weak overseas with Russia’s actions and which ultimately led to what’s now going on in Ukraine. \nDomestically, he had complete control of congress for 2 years and then was blocked for the rest of his 6 years. He arguably failed (arguably because you can only control so much) to control the weaponization of the FBI, IRS, and other bureaus, setting the tone for a new low for when trump would come in.\nACA has its pros and cons like any healthcare bill.",
">\n\nWith the window licking going on in the Republican Party lately and likely moving forward? Yes!",
">\n\nIt generally depends on what happens in the next election cycle. If the folks who brought about January 6th manage to finish the job at the ballot box then expect history to be heavily rewritten. If they manage to be beaten back then his estimation should rise. \nMuch like George W Bush, obamas estimation will rise sharply as he is contrasted with his successor. They way in which he managed himself will become a more striking virtue.",
">\n\nI really don't know this obsession with ratings . If a french president had 60% approval he would consider it a major acheivments.",
">\n\nDespite his positive accomplishments, he will be remembered for triggering the racist backlash that Trump the filth tapped with the racist republican electorate. Trump was able to read the racism and split the country. Unfortunately, being black, Obama triggered it. Not fair, but thats what happened. Would we ever have had Trump and the extreme racism of today without Obama?",
">\n\nGeorge Bush's public image did a 180 from war criminal to lovable ex president who does cute paintings somehow so Im sure Obama will look pretty good too.",
">\n\nI dont think any president in the past 30 years will be viewed favorably, everyone of them committed war crimes...",
">\n\nI think it'll be around where he's seen now, but there is a chance he's seen as a bit more transformational than we think of now.\nFrom a political science perspective there is a view of the waves of presidencies, where FDR is a transformative figure who ushered in a wave of Government As Solution presidents, and that includes the Space Race and even the Republicans, eg Nixon founding the EPA.\nThen Reagan ushered in the Government As Problem presidents and that includes Clinton and his \"ending welfare as we know it.\"\nI think we might have a new era starting with Obama and Obamacare and his targeted intervention like the CFPB, the Iraq withdrawal may be seen as the start of this anti-boots-on-the-ground streak that Trump championed and Biden has continued, especially as the US has gotten into drone strikes instead. Drone strikes are kind of the 'targeted intervention' of war, maybe this is the Targeted Government Intervention era. Trump's China Tariffs would align with that, for example.\nI think there are good arguments for Trump as new-era-beginning too as he's certainly more iconoclastic than Obama stylistically but Biden being elected to put the final stamp on the Obama legacy continuing makes me want to put Obama there. Only time will tell.",
">\n\nAs a foreigner, I will remeber him as the first and only US president that I actually liked. I personally got more knowledgeable an interested in US politics nowadays (5 years). So I don't know or remember any of his bad policies, but I know I liked him the best in my lifetime.",
">\n\nA great president is just that. Whether a democrat or not! All the haters out there should just consider his accomplishments and empathetic compassion for his constituents. He was far from a narcissistic self serving con man. I haven’t the patience to begin typing all the derogatory adjectives I could write about the man who made America Embarrassed Again! Sorry haters, but the facts are the facts, so take off your blinders and rate the man as a progressive president and not just a democrat.",
">\n\nHis foreign policy mistakes will likely have him viewed significantly more critically depending on how much allowing Syria to gas its own civilians and Russia to annex Crimea affects the global landscape in the next few decades.\nFrom a legislative standpoint, his biggest legacy is obviously the ACA, which will probably be viewed as a positive reform. His handling of the 2008 financial crisis could come to be seen as significantly too small given how long the recovery took to happen, but it was still the biggest stimulus package in response to a recession in human history up to that point, and the size was largely limited by a very fiscally conservative senate.\nHis status as the first black president alone makes him historic, and his charisma might turn him into a JFK type figure where he's evaluated more highly in the public consciousness than his actual accomplishments might warrant",
">\n\nWell his peers are Bush, Trump and Biden. Seems like he has some smooth sailing on historical comparisons.",
">\n\nUnfortunately, progressives hate him for whatever reason. He did more to bring us closer universal healthcare in like 6 months than Bernie has done in his entire career, but progressives still hate Obama.",
">\n\nObama actually acted presidential and had good communication skills.\nBoth presidents since have obviously not had very good communication skills at all.",
">\n\nAlways so Interesting to see how people’s memory dictates facts. Obama was painted in a light brush so he is remembered favorly. In reality he killed more innocent people than any president in my lifetime with a drone campaign. Started wars. The ACA was a lie and failure and the bailouts were a failure. How anyone can view him favorably is so interesting to me.",
">\n\nHe'll be remembered for what his Nobel Peace Prize was for: not being Bush Jr.",
">\n\nI think given the shit show of Trump, w no real policy delivered, the arrests and jailing of Trumps appointees, fumbling Covid, Jan 6th riots, and setting the Republicans up for an even harder fight to win elections and the popular vote…..you’ll see Obama in a more positive light as the what’s possible when we have a functioning leadership and what happens when you do not. \nBasically a distinct before and after leadership results. BUT then again depends on which state you learn US History in and what you believe to be real or fake news…will def impact that narrative",
">\n\nProbably but only because the American Empire is collapsing and it only gets worse from here on out.......",
">\n\nI do believe over the decades he'll be viewed in the top third of American presidents. Obama was an excellent communicator and he'll be looked favorably for the Affordable Healthcare Act. He'll receive negative remarks for failing to resolve the war in Afghanistan.",
">\n\nHe served between Bush and Trump, two of the worst Presidents of all time, this alone will make people view Obama favorably.",
">\n\nYeah, dude still approved missions that killed kids with drones. Nothing “good” about that one.",
">\n\nNo, it will get much, much, worse.\nObama broke many of the social norms around being President, and not for the better.\nHe's the first US president to remain in politics. He's the first \"forever president\". Every one of his predecessors stepped away from politics, and didn't meddle in the affairs of his successors\nHis weaponization of the Federal government took abusing power to a new level. Sure, Clinton had the IRS audit every woman who accused him of sexual impropriety. That pales next to Obama creating a fake russian narrative of Trump, and speading it to every agency in the Federal government. Or how about weaponizing the IRS to shut down PACs that align with your opponents, and then destroy the evidence?\nHistory won't be kind to Obama. Deservedly so.",
">\n\nHe was arguably the worst President ever until Biden came along. When this whole idiotic Woke idea is dead, people will realize that Obama was a neo-Marxist anti-American not fit for any office and they had been duped by the media.",
">\n\nI have read no less than 1,000 books and many more scholarly articles studying both since 1978. I believe I have knowledge on the topic. \nThat said, it would be very boring for me to prove my understanding of both to you on a forum like this.",
">\n\nSo then Professor, where was Obama arguing to establish collective ownership of the means of production and abolishment of commodities? And what distinguishes the neo from the paleo?",
">\n\nAs the truth comes out, he will be viewed as the second worst president, being that Biden is by far the worst and Carter coming in at number three.",
">\n\nI think it's fair for history to remember him as the nobel peace prize winner with the most confirmed civilian kills via ordered air strikes.\nIt both shows his accomplishments as well as his unearned media praise.",
">\n\nNope he will be looked upon, with doubts and questions, on why he did so little, for black people as the first Black president ,of the United states of America while passing bills for lmnopq people and everyone else, but nothing specifically for the well being of black people"
] |
Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.
|
[] |
>
I would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.
The Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too."
] |
>
Republican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo."
] |
>
I mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate."
] |
>
Straight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' "platform" Bingo card.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians."
] |
>
It is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card."
] |
>
She is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too."
] |
>
Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee."
] |
>
I would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.
The Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.",
">\n\nSpite is like their main thing…racism is up there too."
] |
>
Republican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.",
">\n\nSpite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo."
] |
>
I mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.",
">\n\nSpite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate."
] |
>
Straight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' "platform" Bingo card.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.",
">\n\nSpite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians."
] |
>
It is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.",
">\n\nSpite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card."
] |
>
She is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.",
">\n\nSpite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too."
] |
>
|
[
"Spite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee.",
">\n\nSpite is like their main thing…racism is up there too.",
">\n\nI would say that it is more vice signaling of racism, Christian Supremacy, scaremongering about Muslims, and misogyny to their base than any actual spite.\nThe Republicans would much rather deal with corporate moderate Democrats and punishing anybody Progressive sends a warning sign to those that might try to stands to the left of the neoliberal corporatist status quo.",
">\n\nRepublican voters don’t care if the person they voted for actually does anything to help the country as long as they hurt the people they hate.",
">\n\nI mean, she is racist as all possible. I get that there is scum on both sides of the isle but getting her out would be a welcome start to punishing racist politicians.",
">\n\nStraight up religious discrimination. Of course, she's also a black, foreign-born woman, so we can add racism and misogyny to this offensive maneuver. She checks off many squares on the Republicans' \"platform\" Bingo card.",
">\n\nIt is mostly racism if you ask me, but I'm sure there is some spite in there too.",
">\n\nShe is a outspoken anti-semite. That is why they want her gone. I make no judgement in any case. But its clear her presence will undermine the goals of the committee."
] |
You could just not get the side. The sandwiches are already pretty calorie dense
|
[] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.