Do you think history will treat Nixon better?

[LBJ Revivalist]

Do you think history will ever treat Nixon better? Should it?
I think he was a good President and the last of the true Liberals, not the Obama kind. His personal demons destroyed him but his flaws shouldn't overshadow the good work he did do as President.

-Approved the Space Shuttle and First Space Station
-Signed EPA and OSHA into law.
-Began the process of making America's military all volunteer
-Brought a period of Detente between the USSR and the USA
-Wanted to enact a Universal Healthcare system that didn't involve mandates.
-Achieved the last balanced budget until 1998.
-Clean Air Act of 1970

[RosettaStoned]

It already has.

[Bo]

I doubt it. Nixon did do a lot of good things, but Watergate will always overtake those things in importance in the minds of historians.

[The Mikado]

More evidence for the "Moderate Democrat 1990 is posting from a time capsule" case.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Indeed. But at least he isn't concern-trolling for once.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

It already has.

Alas for mainstream Ameri.....can historians (Oh sorry that, I had to stifle a yawn there) this is indeed the case. For those who understanding of history stretches beyond the framework that 'American History' have thankfully not given into this revisionist craze.

[LBJ Revivalist]

More evidence for the "Moderate Democrat 1990 is posting from a time capsule" case.

I just find history a lot more interesting than the present day.
We had better generations of rulers back in the past.
I look at the way Archie Bunker did, "And you knew who were you then, girls were girls and men were men...."

[Bo]

-Wanted to enact a Universal Healthcare system that didn't involve mandates.
-Achieved the last balanced budget until 1998.

Wanting to do something and actually doing it are two totally different things. Nixon and Clinton wanted to reform healthcare, but failed. Obama actually succeeded in reforming healthcare. Nixon's balanced budget doesn't really count as much of an achievement since he only had it for one year (his first year) and since he left office with a deficit.

[minionofmidas]

I doubt it. Nixon did do a lot of good things, but Watergate will always overtake those things in importance in the minds of historians.

The problem is not so much what he did but what he thought.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

-Wanted to enact a Universal Healthcare system that didn't involve mandates.
-Achieved the last balanced budget until 1998.

Wanting to do something and actually doing it are two totally different things. Nixon and Clinton wanted to reform healthcare, but failed. Obama actually succeeded in reforming healthcare. Nixon's balanced budget doesn't really count as much of an achievement since he only had it for one year (his first year) and since he left office with a deficit.

Well for not getting the first, blame Ted Kennedy and the Democrats.  Even he admitted later that his decision to block Nixon's proposal was a mistake.

As for the second, his balancing the budget only one time also largely goes to Congress.  He  impounded funds (i.e., not spend money that had been appropriated because the government didn't need to) which was a power Presidents had exercised since the days of Jefferson, and because Congress didn't like how he was doing it, they passed the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.  Ever since, one the money has been appropriated, it must be spent.  That law removed a significant brake on the Federal money train.

[Psychic Octopus]

It may be repaired among the American academia, but it never will be nor should be in the minds of the people.

[President Mitt]

Watergate looks tame compared to other crimes this Dick (Ba-Dum-Ching) has committed. Cambodia should be enough to crucify the man.

[memphis]

Nixon is such a complex figure. He had some really bada$$ accomplishments and proposed some things (guaranteed minumum salary, wage and price controls) that no Democrat (even one labeled a "socialist by the GOP) would ever suggest. He ended the Vietnam War, but first expanded it to Laos and Cambodia. He was an environmentalist. He endorsed ERA and affirmative action, but courted Southern voters with racists overtones. He went to China to spite the Russians. However, he was also an absolute paranoid nutcase who didn't mind twisting the law and using the powers of the presidency against his enemies. Couldn't make this stuff up.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

It already has.

^^^Unfortunately, this.

Whatever legacy that slime ultimately leaves behind, it will be better than what he deserves.

[tpfkaw]

As a general rule of thumb, the more awful a president was, the better "history" treats him, and vice versa.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

As a general rule of thumb, the more awful a president was, the better "history" treats him, and vice versa.

Not necessarily - the pre-Civil War Presidents have not be rehabilitated, nor do some Presidents like Arthur fully get their due.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Nixon wasn't that great for the time period, but he is way better than any President we've had in the last 30 years. Nixon's health care plan was much better than Obama's.

[Associate Justice PiT]

As a general rule of thumb, the more awful a president was, the better "history" treats him, and vice versa.

Not necessarily - the pre-Civil War Presidents have not be rehabilitated, nor do some Presidents like Arthur fully get their due.

     Presidents, like other political figures, have a tendency to be forgotten once enough time has passed. Some big names like Washington & Lincoln are clearly remembered by everybody, but others like Fillmore & Arthur are largely unknown to the general public, & as a consequence now are viewed in a fairly neutral light (neutral in the sense of lacking any strong impressions of them).