Comments on: Of corpse-kicking and His Irrelevancy

By: Rabbit, ran out : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present

Rabbit, ran out : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:33:24 +0000

[...] still-unfinished biography of President James Buchanan (yes–that’s right, readers: Mr. Third-Worst!) It’s rather strange, but it works. If you liked The Ice Storm (either the novel or the [...]

By: Daughters and political dynasties : Historiann : History and sexual politics, 1492 to the present

Mon, 19 Jan 2009 06:27:28 +0000

[...] had two presidents whose sons also became president. (And look how that worked out for us, with Mr. Worst and Mr. Second Worst President ever!) Longtime readers know that I am opposed to nepotism and [...]

By: Historiann

Historiann — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:33:41 +0000

Thanks, Tom–although I enjoy the earthiness of the expression “turd in the punchbowl” regardless of the sly political history context.

Harry Truman is a good example of a President who was unpopular at the time but whose reputation has improved in history–thanks, Mary. He may be one of the only ones. Lincoln was lucky I suppose in that the war turned around in time for his re-election, but then, it’s not like he was handed a nation enjoying peace and prosperity.

That’s one of the reasons I rank Bush as #1 Worst President Ever, and Adams I as #2. Unlike the other contenders–Hoover or Buchanan–things were pretty good when they took office, and it was their perfidy and/or incompetence that drove the country into the ditch.

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 14:24:07 +0000

Historiann–I loved your sly reference to the punch-bowl-drinking ladies of your recent post/discussion about the eighteenth-century engraving! Nice one.

By: K.N.

K.N. — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 13:34:47 +0000

I think it depends on whether or not the president in question can recover from a perceived failure. Lincoln faced a strong opposition from Democrats and Republicans alike in 1864, until Grant and Sherman scored important military victories. Had Atlanta not fallen by election day, we’d likely be talking about George Brinton McLellan as our 17th president.

By: ej

ej — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 06:04:31 +0000

I actually find it shocking that Bush was allowed so many mistakes before the American people said “enough.” Either we are way too forgiving of our leaders, or he was masterful at playing the wayward lad who promised to “do better next time.” If we had only allowed him one mistake, he would never have been re-elected.

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 05:08:02 +0000

What about Harry Truman? His ratings were at 36 percent the spring of 1948 and he managed to be reelected.

By: Indyanna

Indyanna — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:16:41 +0000

Well, Nixon kind of messed up a lot as VICE-President, then got beaten for promotion to the presidency, but was mulliganed back into higher office eight years later. (The *real* one-and-done crowd in recent decades is people who have run for president and not won, or even won and not been inaugurated. They are automatically consigned to the lifetime dustbin of book tours and globetrotting consulting initiatives; for-profit or not).

For that matter, Kennedy screwed the pooch at Bay of Pigs only months into his only term (taking a bad handoff from the Eisenhower/Nixon apparats), and was given the grace to wobble the country toward treacherous waters in Southeast Asia. Opinion is much divided over what he *would* have done if he had lived, but that’s sort of outside the historian’s realm. Hard to believe now how briefly he actually presided, or how that all seemed to have happened hundreds of years ago.

I’m steamrollering over Buchanan (our only Pennsylvania president) tomorrow in a desperate bid to get the Civil War underway and in the can before we crash through the back walls of the semester! Why does the first “half” of the U.S. History survey start on the Bering Land Bridge thousands of years ago and run deep into the Nineteenth Century, so that recent Americanists can glide home at something like a decade a week during the spring semester? Talk about not getting a Mulligan!

By: Erica

Erica — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 02:15:24 +0000

(Oh heavens, I had forgotten Miers. Do Republicans have a trend for picking unqualified women for important positions…)

In order to kick a corpse, one must notice it first. There are really a lot of things far more important than the last couple years of inept flopping about, and the general attitude seems very much to be, “Oh, we have a President? I thought he wasn’t being inaugurated until January.” Bush is just such a mediocre, unimportant person!