Opinion What Measures Make a President Successful?

[Hellowhosthat]

Through tariffs? If anything China produces cheap solar panels so tariffs in China would hurt the transition to green energy.

I mean cheap plastic tat that they make. Tariff that.

 

[Cajun]

If there are no objective measures, and you only view success as implementation of the policies you like, then how can a member of the opposing party ever be successful?

To be fair, with the polarization of things it will be hard to get a proper gauge from some but his list is good. There are some measurables...If Trump can get peace in some of these conflicts, reduce inflation etc I would think that is successful. His list is good but now with Trump there will be few on the otherside that will ever say he does anything good.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Those are still things of which you believe to be important/impactful which make them non-objective.

The question was are there measures of which you can view any president as successful. You said you have no hard measures and they have to be “contextualized” which essentially is saying “was this successful in my eyes?”.

You can use objective measures but you have to contextualize them as I said. You can't expect a president inheriting a recession to produce growth figures the way you can one who inherits a booming one. The latter can be a worse president with better growth figures.

You can do this with other metrics too. For example FDR oversaw far more American casualties under his watch than GWB but in general FDR is see as successful in handling WWII while GWB is considered to have failed in Iraq.

It’s fine to say that’s your position, but it means that you view everything subjectively. In other words, if you like it, it’s good — if you don’t, it’s bad.

No that's not what I'm saying, reread my posts.

 

[Rob Battisti]

To be fair, with the polarization of things it will be hard to get a proper gauge from some but his list is good. There are some measurables...If Trump can get peace in some of these conflicts, reduce inflation etc I would think that is successful. His list is good but now with Trump there will be few on the otherside that will ever say he does anything good.

Sure. But the subjectivity of it makes it, by definition, not a measure. Saying that your measure is the implementation of a successful domestic policy is subjective until you define what a successful domestic policy is. By what measures is your domestic policy successful or not?

It’s fine to express that it is only ones opinion which makes something good or not — so long as you’re willing to admit your biases are what makes that determination.

 

[aerius]

This is a fine position.

“Were they able to successfully execute on their campaign promises” if yes — successful presidency. If no — unsuccessful presidency.

I like to tell people that a good politician and a successful politician aren't necessarily the same thing, in fact, they're almost always mutually exclusive.

 

[Islam Imamate]

It’s fine to express that it is only ones opinion which makes something good or not — so long as you’re willing to admit your biases are what makes that determination.

You're also making determinations based on your biases, more so than I am if anything. For example, why use the metrics you cited such as illegal immigration figures? That's based on your biased priorities. I could just as easily use an opposite metric and judge the POTUS based on naturaluzation and HB1 figures in favor of more immigration.

How so we sort which metric is better? We can cite figures on favor of our arguments but at some point it comes down to values. I think immigration is good so I want more of it and am less bothered by iillegal mmigration than you are, that's a matter of values.

 

[Cajun]

Sure. But the subjectivity of it makes it, by definition, not a measure. Saying that your measure is the implementation of a successful domestic policy is subjective until you define what a successful domestic policy is. By what measures is your domestic policy successful or not?

It’s fine to express that it is only ones opinion which makes something good or not — so long as you’re willing to admit your biases are what makes that determination.

It's why these are usually in the form of public opinion. Academics try to do this but it's usually skewed by their own politics. Most of it will lay with the economy. If it's good, inflation is down, unemployment down, reducing the deficit and no major global conflicts for the US then most will regard a presidency as a win. There are objective numbers from each of those items which usually weigh the heaviest on the public. All of the ones I listed have measurables against the benchmark of Jan 20. The ones I've listed are ones that everyone agrees on. Many of the others are as you point out are based on your political persuasion. But the reality is, now we've gotten so polarized the the success or lack there of is just blamed on the previous one if it's the other party. So for some Trump can never be successful no matter what he does.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I mean cheap plastic tat that they make. Tariff that.

Idk if tariffs are a good way to achieve that.

 

[deviake]

It depends what they're successful at. Someone can be successful doing horrendous shit they promised to do.

As to what I look for as success, that's actually hard for me to answer. I guess it'd be if they improve the overall condition of the people they govern to the furthest extent possible while causing the least amount of harm in the place they govern and abroad. That's very broad and not a "technical" answer but I'm not sure one is necessary to answer this question and may even detract from the premise, especially since it's personalized so I'm not sure there's a need to get into individual policy nor politics.

 

[Rob Battisti]

You're also making determinations based on your biases, more so than I am if anything. For example, why use the metrics you cited such as illegal immigration figures? That's based on your biased priorities. I could just as easily use an opposite metric and judge the POTUS based on naturaluzation and HB1 figures in favor of more immigration.

How so we sort which metric is better? We can cite figures on favor of our arguments but at some point it comes down to values. I think immigration is good so I want more of it and am less bothered by iillegal mmigration than you are, that's a matter of values.

It’s not about comparing which is better.

The difference is, the ones I listed are objective measures.

If, as you said, you don’t have objective measures, than that’s okay.

 

[Islam Imamate]

It’s not about comparing which is better.

The difference is, the ones I listed are objective measures.

There's subjectivity and discretion in the decision as to which "objective measures" should be used. For instance, why choose lower illegal migration rate as the "objective measure" of success over net migration and naturalization rate? Why growth rate over unemployment?

Not to mention is clear that some subjective measures are better and more relevant than objective metrics. For escape average rainfall is a more objective metric than national sentiment but less useful.

If, as you said, you don’t have objective measures than that’s okay.

How about average life expectancy and box office ticket sales? Those are objective measures right?

 

[Rob Battisti]

There's subjectivity and discretion in the decision as to which "objective measures" should be used. For instance, why choose lower illegal migration rate as the "objective measure" of success over net migration and naturalization rate? Why growth rate over unemployment?

Not to mention is clear that some subjective measures are better and more relevant than objective metrics. For escape average rainfall is a more objective metric than national sentiment but less useful.

How about average life expectancy and box office ticket sales? Those are objective measures right?

By all means, choose those things. I never said mine were best, just that they were my objective measures for success.

I think life expectancy would be a fine one. Not sure how box office sales would be an indicator of presidential success, but yes — they are objective measures.

If your measures are net migration and unemployment, they would be completely fine. It’s not a discussion on what measures are best, just more about what people care about — objectively — as opposed to subjective things they like or dislike in the moment.

Originally you said the implementation of a successful domestic policy. I was simply pointing out that such a position could mean so many different things so I was trying to get to some objective measures to see what you actually care about.

Just saying “a successful domestic policy” would essentially mean seeing the things you want to see policy wise being implemented— which is subjective.

 

[Islam Imamate]

By all means, choose those things. I never said mine were best, just that they were my objective measures for success.

I think life expectancy would be a fine one. Not sure how box office sales would be an indicator of presidential success, but yes — they are objective measures.

If your measures are net migration and unemployment, they would be completely fine. It’s not a discussion on what measures are best, just more about what people care about — objectively — as opposed to subjective things they like or dislike in the moment.

Why not average rainfall then? That's an objective measure, would judging president's based on that make more sense than a subjective assessment of overall approval and favorability?

Originally you said the implementation of a successful domestic policy. I was simply pointing out that such a position could mean so many different things so I was trying to get to some objective measures to see what you actually care about.

Just saying “a successful domestic policy” would essentially mean seeing the things you want to see policy wise being implemented— which is subjective.

Not entirely subjective because you'd presumably evaluate these agendas according to a holistic set of measures both subjective and objective.

If there's healthcare reform that's supposed to make drugs cheaper and more accessible then there are objective measures you'd look at to see if the policy worked. But if that's not the agenda then you wouldn't look at those measures as a barometer of success necessarily.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

Idk if tariffs are a good way to achieve that.

Well if you tariff that stuff specifically then hopefully people would buy less of it. Stuff like shein and temu is the scurge of the planet right now. People buying boatloads of shit they don't need.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Well if you tariff that stuff specifically then hopefully people would buy less of it. Stuff like shein and temu is the scurge of the planet right now. People buying boatloads of shit they don't need.

What if that leads to a trade war and China issues retaliatory tariffs? At what point is it not worth it?

 

[filthybliss]

It is difficult to really gauge because there are multiple variables on the table especially in these past 10 yrs. But in general, building more bridges overseases than burning them, low unemployment/poverty rates, higher life expectancies, and etc.

 

[Lead]

Firstly, handling their branch within their Constitutional authority. Do they enforce and uphold the current laws in place? Do they avoid putting cases through the courts about actions they don’t even believe they can do? Even certain things within their authority but abused can be a problem. This aspect is important to me before policy begins as it should be expected and the minimum bar for the role.

Next, working with Congress to pass good legislation and/ or veto bad legislation. This can fall into one’s ideological leanings so your going to get different grades from person to person, though over time I think it becomes more clear whether a bill was popular/ effective if it remains and isn’t repealed later on. I’m not going to do a whole post every policy position I have to reflect in this answer but something more specific I’d point out is the president should do well during times of economic crisis to allow for the best possible rebound rather than long term damage from doing nothing.

Lastly, the president is in large control of foreign policy. Maintaining strong relationships with allies and being long term oriented toward hostile countries is important. This is a place where you need some continuity between administrations as you don’t want international players simply waiting for another election to get their way. I know it can’t be 100% continuous and some times call for change but it should be well thought out and have a good reason behind it.

There’s more but that’s what’s on my mind initially.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

What if that leads to a trade war and China issues retaliatory tariffs? At what point is it not worth it?

I'm a bit of an environmentalist so if it means less meaningless shit getting made and ruining the planet then it's gonna take a long time to get to that point for me.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I'm a bit of an environmentalist so if it means less meaningless shit getting made and ruining the planet then it's gonna take a long time to get to that point for me.

What do you mean by "meaningless shit"?

 

[avenue94]

A president's success comes from implementing a successful domestic policy agenda through a combination of working through Congressional legislation and executive orders, effective grand strategy and diplomacy on the world stage, and managing crises both foreign and domestic.

The last part is really key and can't really be predicted that well. JFK would be the prime example in my book, given he otherwise didn't have a chance to do a whole lot.