U.S. Grant
War hero, savior of the Nation U.S. Grant was a shoo-in for President. His term was a disastrous mess.
Just because you were a war hero doesn't give you the judgment and temperament for the presidency, eh? And Grant was elected in 1872, just a few years after the end of the Civil War.
Can the Democratic ad-makers do something with that? Would they?
Just because you were a war hero doesn't give you the judgment and temperament for the presidency, eh? And Grant was elected in 1872, just a few years after the end of the Civil War.
Can the Democratic ad-makers do something with that? Would they?
Advertisement
Grant was also a drunk.
And if you think he was a war hero, just look at the causalities the Union suffered at places like Cold Harbor while under his command.
August 24, 2008 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope, it's alot easier to go back the last 8 years than to try to go back 100.
August 24, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
But a lot CAN be done with "The times require more than a good soldier. They require a wise leader." THAT should be the drumbeat - at least every time the POW card gets played (which means we'd hear it all the time).
Sadly, that's essentially what Wesley Clark said, only he said it so poorly. I wish they would give him Biden's speaking slot when -- Thank Heaven!! -- Biden moves to the VP nominee spot.
August 24, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are some interesting similarities.
Grants presidency has uniformly been judged a failure by historians on the basis he was a nice guy who had a hard time saying "no" to requests for special favors.
There was a huge amount of corruption in his time of office.
McCain has been very good friends with K Street in his career in the Senate and I worry that his presidency might be marked by a continuation of the rampant kind of business/legislative syncytium that the Beltway has become.
August 24, 2008 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink