> On what? Name something besides the war. And, name something that a conservative would be proud of.
The war was his key, defining issue, and it is arbitrary and wrong to exclude that when evaluating his overall performance. It should receive most of his performance weighting. All else — quite rightly — is small stuff by way of comparison.
As a war-time president he did a very good job. Much better than FDR, for example.
He would have been an abject failure in 9/11 was able to happen more than once.
As to the “small stuff”, the Illegal Aliens issue would be tops, followed by this current Financial Crisis. He would have scored a near perfect mark had he nailed these bonus points.
Still, I’d give him 85%.
Well, that raises a point since all the other stuff, according to you is "small stuff". What would legacy be without the war? Take that away and what would you have had? A president who wants open borders. A president who, apparently picked mostly turncoats for his cabinet. A president who picked a lot of inept people for his cabinet.
As to the “small stuff”, the Illegal Aliens issue would be tops, followed by this current Financial Crisis. He would have scored a near perfect mark had he nailed these bonus points.
The invasion of the United States by over 15 million foreigners is not "small stuff". How would New Zeelanders react to an invasion of millions of foreigners? Would you call it small stuff and let your president have a pass?
Ooops! Sorry. New Zealanders...