If it wasn't for 'Nam would LBJ be one the best Presidents in the 20th Century?

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

Without 'Nam he would have been the American Merkel.

[Kingpoleon]

No. Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Reagan, and Clinton would be the top six. I would argue Kennedy, Ford, and H. W. were better Presidents, too.

Johnson made it quite clear he was doing it for political reasons, and the Great Society ending up pushing along stagflation.

[Donerail]

He'd easily be top two, probably behind FDR. Of course, without Vietnam he'd likely have been President for a decade, and who knows how the additional four years would have pushed him. Regardless, the Great Society is one of the most impactful pieces of legislation ever passed, and to rank LBJ below a doddering idiot like Reagan is a hack move.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

He'd easily be top two, probably behind FDR. Of course, without Vietnam he'd likely have been President for a decade, and who knows how the additional four years would have pushed him. Regardless, the Great Society is one of the most impactful pieces of legislation ever passed

[Beet]

The crazy thing is, until 1963 LBJ would have been castigated by far-left liberals of the jfern set as a Dixiecrat, Russell ally, sellout centrist in the pocket of the military-industrial complex, who stabbed African-Americans in the back with the toothless Civil Rights Act of 1957.

[RINO Tom]

The crazy thing is, until 1963 LBJ would have been castigated by far-left liberals of the jfern set as a Dixiecrat, Russell ally, sellout centrist in the pocket of the military-industrial complex, who stabbed African-Americans in the back with the toothless Civil Rights Act of 1957.

He still should be thought of as those things.

[Kingpoleon]

The crazy thing is, until 1963 LBJ would have been castigated by far-left liberals of the jfern set as a Dixiecrat, Russell ally, sellout centrist in the pocket of the military-industrial complex, who stabbed African-Americans in the back with the toothless Civil Rights Act of 1957.

He still should be thought of as those things.

I'd hardly call him a centrist. I'd call him the biggest flip flopper ever to win a nomination.

[Jaguar4life]

http://alternate-timelines.proboards.com Here's a place you can  talk about this

[Del Tachi]

Johnson is already one of the best 20th century presidents even considering Vietnam.

[Beet]

Johnson is already one of the best 20th century presidents even considering Vietnam.

[Bismarck]

No, his manipulation of the federal reserve caused stagflation for one thing. His immigration policies have had mixed effects, helping bring talent here but also causing tensions. The large expansion of the welfare state is also a very mixed legacy, helping many but also causing long term societal decay. The CRA and VRA are big accomplishments and Johnson does deserve credit for those. As a side note the CRA had bipartisan support and bipartisan opposition and either side trying to deny that is a little silly.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Um, HELL no. He purposefully put blacks in a cycle of welfare and poverty just for votes. Surpsised more people don’t notice this.

So you'd prefer they'd have just been left in poverty?  More seriously, the movement of blacks into the Democratic camp had begun long before LBJ and his anti-poverty measures weren't racially specific, unless you consider the Appalachian Regional Commission which covers an area significantly whiter than the rest of America.

https://www.arc.gov/assets/research_reports/DataOverviewfrom2010to2014ACS.pdf (Table 3.1)

[Wakie77]

Um, HELL no. He purposefully put blacks in a cycle of welfare and poverty just for votes. Surpsised more people don’t notice this.

Because before the 1960's things were so good for blacks in America?

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Without Vietnam he probably could have won another term and that likely changes everything on how people see him.

I think, if re-elected in 1968, Johnson likely wouldn't have been president until January 1973, regardless of Vietnam. He would have been dead by some time in 1971 due to his health problems what leaves us with President Humphrey for another one and a half years. In 1972, either George Romney or Nelson Rockefeller would have beaten Humphrey.

LBJ was not ill while President.  He resumed smoking in retirement, much to his detriment.

LBJ is already one of the greatest in the 20th century.

[MillennialModerate]

Yes, without a doubt he’s Top 5 at worst without Nam. But that’s a massive IF. That’s the whole ballgame. BUT at the same time he only became President based on a fluke. Without that he’s known as a great senator but one of the least active VP’s ever (unless of course JFK changes course and enlists him to push legislation through the Senate)

[MarkD]

Low marks for LBJ given the fact that he appointed two liberal activists to the Supreme Court. Thurgood Marshall was chosen for appointment because he was an icon of progress in racial justice, not because he was dedicated to objectivity as a judge -- which he wasn't. Marshall once said that his philosophy of how to decide cases he hears is, "You do what you think is right and let the law catch up." LBJ appointed Abe Fortas because Fortas was Johnson's crony.