How will history remember President Clinton?

[LBJ Revivalist]

In the years and decades to come, say 30, 40 years from now, how do you think Clinton will be remembered? Will  he have left a good legacy as President behind in the same way that Truman (though hated in his own time) is admired and respected now?

[fezzyfestoon]

Probably average-good.  Things that will stick out are the budget, 1994, Monica, and maybe Hillary.

[Psychic Octopus]

Clinton was never hated "in his one time" so I doubt that will change. He'll be remembered fairly positively because of the good economy, and Monica, but that will pretty much be it. He'll generally fade into the background after he dies; his presidency the relic of another age. In all, considered a good president, but not a great one.

[LBJ Revivalist]

Clinton was never hated "in his one time" so I doubt that will change. He'll be remembered fairly positively because of the good economy, and Monica, but that will pretty much be it. He'll generally fade into the background after he dies; his presidency the relic of another age. In all, considered a good president, but not a great one.

Basically like an Ike.
The public (as in, general American) loves Ike, but they probably couldn't tell you many things about his Presidency. They just know he was a good President. Both he and Ike were the same: Moderate, centrist "do nothing" Presidents--And that's a good thing. The less you did, the less controversial you are. FDR, Reagan--Both big movers as President, both controversial; Hated or loved.

With Ike, there's few people around who 'hate' him, and I think once all of the "Family Values" Boomers are gone, few will hate Clinton.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Former President Clinton. I suppose he'll be remembered as a good president, but of course it's too early to make predictions.

Clinton was never hated "in his one time" so I doubt that will change. He'll be remembered fairly positively because of the good economy, and Monica, but that will pretty much be it. He'll generally fade into the background after he dies; his presidency the relic of another age. In all, considered a good president, but not a great one.

Basically like an Ike.
The public (as in, general American) loves Ike, but they probably couldn't tell you many things about his Presidency. They just know he was a good President. Both he and Ike were the same: Moderate, centrist "do nothing" Presidents--And that's a good thing. The less you did, the less controversial you are. FDR, Reagan--Both big movers as President, both controversial; Hated or loved.

With Ike, there's few people around who 'hate' him, and I think once all of the "Family Values" Boomers are gone, few will hate Clinton.

Reagan and FDR aren't the best examples.  I'm sure some people on the "other" side hate them, but even many liberals/Democrats I'm sure liked/like Reagan, and I bet some conservatives/Republicans like FDR too. Otherwise, they wouldn't be as popular as they are.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Only radical libertairians hate FDR, while plenty of people hate Reagan.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

A good president.

[useful idiot]

Average to mediocre

[Magic 8-Ball]

Good, but his won't be a long section in textbooks.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

They'll wrongly remember him nostalgically as the last president of "the Age of Moderation" or something similar. It won't make sense but he did preside over an age of prosperity where most people thought a consensus had been reached on most of the issues.

[Mint]

Subpar to terrible because of economic policies like Gramm–Leach–Bliley and NAFTA. In general I think 1981-2017 or so is going to be considered the second gilded age.

[Frink]

A relatively mediocre caretaker in a time of prosperity. Remembered much like Calvin Coolidge in the history books, but probably taking even less heat for his presidency due to the slightly longer time before the consequences of his economic policies were fully "appreciated" and actually choosing to take more of the spotlight. Some more academic views will probably give him more of his share of the blame, but its hard to see that becoming dominant in the public consciousness.

Whether thats deserved is another discussion altogether.

[opebo]

Subpar to terrible because of economic policies like Gramm–Leach–Bliley and NAFTA. In general I think 1981-2017 or so is going to be considered the second gilded age.

That, and the era where the seeds of decline into third world status were sown.

[Guderian]

He will basically be remembered as the guy who presided over the (relative) Pax Americana period between the fall of the Soviet Union and 9/11. In other words, barely. In historical terms it's always foreign > domestic. Nobody will care in 2080 what Dow index was in 1999 or whether he lied about the blowjob.

[k-onmmunist]

Average

[LBJ Revivalist]

He will basically be remembered as the guy who presided over the (relative) Pax Americana period between the fall of the Soviet Union and 9/11. In other words, barely. In historical terms it's always foreign > domestic. Nobody will care in 2080 what Dow index was in 1999 or whether he lied about the blowjob.

It's a shame, isn't it?
I mean look at Ike. Great President, great man. Joe Public doesn't really remember anything significant about him, why? Because generally his Presidency was a period of peace and prosperity.
It seems Presidents are really only remembered if they preside over wars, or do something horrible.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     He'll be someone that nobody cares about, ultimately. Even if we were to assume that Guderian's assumption that foreign issues get more air than domestic ones was untrue (it is spot on, really), Clinton was pretty much just in the right place at the right time.

     For that matter, almost anybody would be looked upon favorably as a result of being President at that time. As soon as people forget those good times, they'll forget Clinton too.

[Psychic Octopus]

     He'll be someone that nobody cares about, ultimately. Even if we were to assume that Guderian's assumption that foreign issues get more air than domestic ones was untrue (it is spot on, really), Clinton was pretty much just in the right place at the right time.

     For that matter, almost anybody would be looked upon favorably as a result of being President at that time. As soon as people forget those good times, they'll forget Clinton too.

That's pretty much what I think will happen. A hundred years from now, he'll basically be an Eisenhower without the war-hero status. I think he'll do alright in the presidential rankings (somewhere in the mid-to-bottom teens), but any knowledge about him outside of his cheating on his wife will be vague. His textbook section will be short. His successor will get much more attention then him, probably.

[courts]

    He'll be someone that nobody cares about, ultimately. Even if we were to assume that Guderian's assumption that foreign issues get more air than domestic ones was untrue (it is spot on, really), Clinton was pretty much just in the right place at the right time.

     For that matter, almost anybody would be looked upon favorably as a result of being President at that time. As soon as people forget those good times, they'll forget Clinton too.

That's pretty much what I think will happen. A hundred years from now, he'll basically be an Eisenhower without the war-hero status. I think he'll do alright in the presidential rankings (somewhere in the mid-to-bottom teens), but any knowledge about him outside of his cheating on his wife will be vague. His textbook section will be short. His successor will get much more attention then him, probably.

I strongly disagree. Eisenhower had a lot of major developments happen on his watch like the high way system, the beginnings of real desegregation (though he was quite racist obviously and dragged his heels on a lot), plus is generally well regarded for his unusually strong skills in mediation and warnings when it comes to foreign policy. Clinton really didn't leave behind that sort of legacy, although you could again argue he contributed greatly to our current predicament.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

As having horrible taste in women

[courts]

I think she was actually cute, you have to wonder why he'd ever want to be near Paula Jones though.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I think she was actually cute, you have to wonder why he'd ever want to be near Paula Jones though.

Eleanor Mondale was better than them all