Reply #7: Wasn't the intent

[zipplewrath]

The point wasn't to compare them, but merely to point out that early success is no guarantee of the same point of view at the end of an administartion. Things seen as successes early on, can have a different view down the road. Carter's Olympic boycott was widely supported at the time, and is seen vastly less favorably now. NAFTA is seen a a serious problem on the Left, and to some extent on the Right. DADT and DOMA are issues that democrats campaign against. The repeal of Glass Stegal is now something that Clinton has to defend. For the genius that Greenspan was considered at the time, his reputation has taken a hit from events that post date his time in office.

We won't re-argue HCR, but it is notable that Krugman is already describing how it falls short of addressing healthcare costs, and it hasn't even been a year. Our retirees are being notified of changes in their healthcare, driven by the HCR bill, and they ain't happy. Those kinds of changes in attitude can happen fast on what appear at first blush to be considered "successes". And it can all disappear in one "Katrina moment" or terrorist attack. And as I say, LBJ had alot of success overshadowed greatly by vietnam. Things aren't going well in either Afghanistan or Iraq, and it's costing a boat load of money.