Grover Cleveland

The Truth About Presidential Executive Orders From 1893-2013

New statistics have emerged regarding the use of Presidential executive orders, now being hotly contested because President Barack Obama is issuing 23 such orders on gun regulation, in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Massacre.

All Presidents from Grover Cleveland’s second term through Obama’s first term are covered in assessing how much these Presidents utilized executive orders. Thanks to New York Magazine for these statistics.

So for conservatives and Republicans, they can be excited to point out that Franklin D. Roosevelt, who they hate, issued, by far, the most executive orders. But of course, FDR presided during the Great Depression and World War II, the greatest crises since the Civil War, and, of course, FDR also served three complete terms and started a fourth before dying in office.

But after FDR, one discovers that Herbert Hoover was a close second in the four years of his term, having to deal with the Great Depression erupting in his first year in office. Of course, some conservatives think of Hoover as a progressive, but that is a major misunderstanding in fact!

Woodrow Wilson comes a close third, and this makes conservatives feel justified that it is Democrats, such as FDR and Wilson, who are the biggest “villains” on executive orders.

But then, how does one explain that below Wilson are Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, not much behind Wilson, but adored by conservatives? And next is William Howard Taft, considered a conservative when Chief Justice of the Supreme Court a decade after his Presidency. These three Presidents are Republicans, imagine that!

The list continues in order as follows:

Theodore Roosevelt
Harry Truman
Jimmy Carter
John F. Kennedy
Gerald Ford
Lyndon B. Johnson
Richard Nixon
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Ronald Reagan
Bill Clinton
George H. W. Bush
William McKinley
George W. Bush
Barack Obama
Grover Cleveland

Hey, wait a minute here! Obama is next to last of these 21 Presidents? How is that possible, after the rhetoric employed by Republicans such as Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky? Could it be that Paul does not know the facts, and does not know history very well? You know the answer!

And executive orders have become quite rare after Truman, so were most utilized by the eight Presidents from TR through Truman.

In other words, Barack Obama has NOT abused the executive orders authority, and has hardly used it, and Republicans TR, Taft, Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover all used it an amazing amount of times!

But do conservatives really care to know the truth? Again, the answer is obvious!

Second Term Presidencies Are Difficult: The Odds Against Success Of Barack Obama!

When one examines two term Presidencies, it is clear that there is a great likelihood of disappointment and failure as the President becomes a “lame duck”, and particularly, so after the midterm elections, as everyone looks forward to the race for his successor in office.

The following Presidents had difficult second terms:

Thomas Jefferson–with the Chesapeake Affair
James Madison–with the British attack on Washington DC during the War of 1812
Ulysses S. Grant–with the Panic of 1873 and exposure of the Credit Mobilier scandals
Grover Cleveland–with the Panic of 1893 and the Pullman Strike
Woodrow Wilson–with the First World War and the Treaty Of Versailles and his stroke
Franklin D. Roosevelt–with the failure of the Supreme Court “Packing” Plan and Recession Of 1937-1938
Harry Truman–with the Korean War and the Red Scare (McCarthyism)
Richard Nixon–with the Watergate Scandal
Ronald Reagan–with the Iran-Contra Scandal
Bill Clinton–with the Monica Lewinsky Scandal and the Impeachment Trial
George W. Bush–with the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and Hurricane Katrina and failed attempt to privatize Social Security

The only Presidents to have successful second terms were:

George Washington
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
Theodore Roosevelt
Dwight D. Eisenhower

Barack Obama hopes to bring about:

Immigration Reform Legislation
Gun Control Legislation
Climate Change Legislation
Stability in International Affairs

The likelihood of success is very doubtful, however, with so much division, conflict, turmoil, and polarization, caused by the Tea Party Movement and the Republican control of the House of Representatives.

At most, Obama might be able to promote changes in the judiciary, particularly on the Supreme Court, if vacancies occur, as is expected, but even there, it is assured there will be major battles over every appointment, and the possibility of filibustering nominees.

This reality is already showing itself with the interference and opposition to Susan Rice to be Secretary of State, before she was ever considered for nomination, and now Chuck Hagel, a possible choice for Secretary of Defense, who despite being a Republican, has already built up major opposition in the party that he represented in the Senate for 12 years from the state of Nebraska!

There seems the likelihood that no matter what Obama does or says, he will have vehement opposition, not only during the first two years, but even in his last two years as a “lame duck”, having less influence each month as the Presidential Election Of 2016 approaches!

Chris Christie’s Weight: A Disqualifying Factor For The Presidency?

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie was asked last night by Barbara Walters of ABC whether his weight was a disqualifying factor the Presidency in 2016.

His response was negative, with the comment that he has done eighteen hour days, particularly in the recent Hurricane Sandy crisis which devastated the shoreline of his state.

But his statement does not remove the concern about whether the 50 year old New Jersey Governor is healthy enough to take on the burdens of the Presidency in four years, and for a theoretical eight years beyond 2016.

William Howard Taft was our heaviest President at 325-350 pounds, and is famous for taking long naps in the middle of the day, and being much less active than his predecessor, Theodore Roosevelt, and his successor, Woodrow Wilson.

Grover Cleveland was the second heaviest President at about 250 pounds, and no other President has been anywhere near as heavy as Taft and Cleveland. However, Bill Clinton did have problems with weight from his fast food habits before and during his White House years.

It is believed that Christie is far heavier than Taft, and it is a serious matter, as to whether he would have a long life span, and could handle the pressures of the Presidency with such an obesity problem.

At the least, it would have to be required that Christie provide detailed health information, and if he refused, a la Mitt Romney failing to provide detailed financial information, then he should be eliminated as a potential Presidential nominee, as we need a vigorous, healthy person running for President!

Barack Obama Joins A Unique “Fraternity”: Presidents Who Have Won A Second Term In The White House!

Barack Obama last night joined a unique “fraternity”—Presidents who have won a second term in the White House.

The following Presidents won a second term:

George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
Andrew Jackson
Abraham Lincoln
Ulysses Grant
Grover Cleveland (with one term in between where he won popular vote, but lost the electoral vote in 1888)
William McKinley
Woodrow Wilson
Franklin D. Roosevelt (who won 4 terms before 22nd Amendment was added to the Constitution)
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Richard Nixon
Ronald Reagan
Bill Clinton
George W. Bush
Barack Obama

So 17 Presidents, out of 43 who have held the office, have had a second term.

Of course, Lincoln, McKinley and Nixon failed to finish their second term, with the first two assassinated, and Nixon resigning.

This is a select group, a little more than 40 percent of our Presidents, but what it offers is the likelihood that Obama will end up in the top ten of our Presidents if he has any major success in his second term!

Mitt Romney’s Foreign Policy Debut In Great Britain: Total Disaster!

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the GOP Presidential nominee, has struck out in his first foray into foreign policy, of which he has no background or experience at all!

Of all places, he bombed in Great Britain, the closest ally and friend of the United States for the past century!

He stupidly criticized London as not having prepared adequately for the Olympics, which totally insulted the mayor of London, as well as British Prime Minister David Cameron.

This man cannot utter a statement that is not seen as inadequate, as incomplete, needing further explanation, or being a pure embarrassment!

The British press is comparing Romney to Sarah Palin and George W. Bush! What kind of hope of diplomacy with our closest ally is seen as possible when the first impression is so negative?

British observers have said that Romney came across as without “charm, warmth, humour, or sincerity”!

What is a greater indictment of Romney than that statement? All of it is TOTALLY TRUE, as Romney is clearly a total PHONY, unconcerned about how people feel, and clearly, if he can alienate Great Britain, imagine Iran, China, Russia, North Korea, etc!

Romney is giving further proof that he is the WORST GOP Presidential nominee since James G. Blaine, the extremely corrupt nominee in 1884, against Democrat Grover Cleveland!

Realize this includes Richard Nixon and George W. Bush, but realistically, Romney is far worse than either of them or any other nominee since Blaine 128 years ago!

Romney is clearly digging his own grave!

Mitt Romney: Gutless Wonder And Tool Of The Billionaires!

Mitt Romney, the Republican Presidential nominee, is more than ever looking as possibly the worst Republican nominee for President since the Gilded Age and James G. Blaine, who was seen as totally corrupt, and lost the Presidential Election of 1884 to Democrat Grover Cleveland!

Mitt Romney has proved to be a “gutless wonder”! He is unable to stand up to Grover Norquist and his tax fanatics who want not one extra dollar ever to be granted to the US government. He is unable to stand up to neoconservatives, who want to go back to another “Cold War” with Russia, and want to bomb Iran immediately. He is unable to stand up to right wing social conservatives who want to promote a Christian nation. He is unable to stand up to the ultimate bully, Donald Trump, who is a literal nightmare, with Romney realizing that if he were to come out against Trump’s reckless rhetoric about Barack Obama, he would have his campaign destroyed by the vindictive, prima donna, who George Will, the conservative commentator, called an example of how a not very bright rich person could gain attention of the news media.

Romney has no guts or courage, and would become a tool of the billionaires, such as those who financed the campaigns of Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum, and kept them going for as long as they did.

Imagine this, a man who is a QUARTER billionaire being controlled by true billionaires, who want us to go back to the corruption and mendacity of the Gilded Age after a century of constant reforms under both Democratic and Republican Presidents, who worked to be in the mainstream!

Romney is a threat to American democracy as we know it, since he has no spine, no backbone, and is willing to sell his soul to the devil, because of his insane need to be President, unhappy with his family, his religion, and his massive wealth! Such an ambition for one so fortunate borders on mental illness, sorry to say!

But at the same time, Romney cannot relate to normal human beings, as his plastic, stiff nature shows through in everything he does and utters!

His campaign is indeed a sad commentary on American politics and the Republican Party!

History Favors Obama and Democratic Party Second Term Presidencies

In the discussion over whether Barack Obama will have a second term of office, one must consider history as a guide.

If one looks at the facts, one discovers that only THREE Democratic Presidents have ever been defeated for re-election–Martin Van Buren in 1840; Grover Cleveland in 1888 (even though he actually won the popular vote by about 100,000 nationally); and Jimmy Carter in 1980.

So in the past 124 years, only one Democrat has lost re-election, and face the facts, Barack Obama is NOT Jimmy Carter and Mitt Romney is not Ronald Reagan!

Grover Cleveland came back to win in the following election over Benjamin Harrison who had defeated him in 1888, being the only nonconsecutive terms President in American history.

Woodrow Wilson had a very close contest against Charles Evans Hughes for re-election in 1916, but won.

Franklin D. Roosevelt still had over 20 percent unemployment when he first ran for re-election in 1936, but won a landslide over Alf Landon, as well as solid victories over Wendell Willkie in 1940 and Thomas E. Dewey in 1944.

Harry Truman overcame all polls and defeated Dewey in an upset victory in 1948, even after the opposition party had won both houses of Congress in 1946.

Lyndon B. Johnson won the biggest popular vote landslide in history over Barry Goldwater in 1964.

Bill Clinton won a solid victory over Bob Dole in 1996, despite having lost both houses of Congress in 1994.

And despite criticisms, Barack Obama has a positive record of achievement in his first term to match that of Wilson and FDR in their first term and Lyndon B. Johnson in his first year, and more than Grover Cleveland, Harry Truman, and Bill Clinton in their first term, and Jimmy Carter in his only term of office.

So don’t bet too heavily on Obama losing re-election in November!

Ranking Presidents Affected By Being A One Term Or Two Term President?

The game of ranking Presidents is a continuous topic among historians, political scientists, journalists, and ordinary citizens.

In the upcoming June issue of Presidential Studies Quarterly, Professor Curt Nichols, an assistant professor of political science at Baylor University in Texas, comes up with a new theory and premise about how Presidents are ultimately ranked in history.

Nichols used a statistical method known as regression analysis, utilizing Presidential ranking polls conducted by C Span, the Wall Street Journal, and the Siena Research Institute.

Each poll has different factors in judging Presidential leadership, with C Span having ten.

But Nichols says the rating score of Presidents is ultimately raised if the following six factors are considered:

Number of years served
Wartime leadership
If transformation of political landscape occurs in their term
If they are part of the Founding Fathers group
If they are considered “progressive” and pursue “equal justice for all”
If they are assassinated progressives

At the same time, two factors will decrease the rating scores of Presidents:

If the President is impeached, resigns, or has major political scandals during his administration
If they push the nation into political crisis or are unable to lift the country out of a political crisis

Going by this discussion, Nichols believes that IF Barack Obama is defeated for re-election, he will rank only as “average”, as number 22, between William McKinley and George H. W. Bush.

But Nichols also believes that If Barack Obama is re-elected to the Presidency, he could end up as high as number FOUR, behind Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George Washington, and ahead of Thomas Jefferson!

There is lots of room for debate on the Nichols viewpoint, but it certainly will cause much more discussion and analysis of the men who have been President of the United States.

A few observations here:

If wartime Presidents have an edge, then why is James Madison, William McKinley, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush rated quite low on the rankings list generally accepted?

One term Presidencies that stick out as better include James K. Polk and John F. Kennedy.

Two term Presidencies that are seen negatively include James Madison, Ulysses Grant, Grover Cleveland, and George W. Bush.

So whether having a second term really helps raise the stature of a President is still very debatable.

And whether Barack Obama could end up ranked ahead of Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton is something that will be hotly debated into the long term future.

President Vs. President In Presidential Elections: 14 Times and 20 Presidents

On George Washington’s actual birthday, 280 years ago (1732), it is appropriate to ask how many times has there been a Presidential election in which two Presidents opposed each other?

The answer is 14 times, and a total of 20 Presidents have competed against a fellow Oval Office occupant, present or future!

Here are the details:

Presidential Elections of 1796 and 1800–John Adams vs Thomas Jefferson, with Adams first winning, and then Jefferson.

Presidential Elections Of 1824 and 1828–John Quincy Adams vs Andrew Jackson, with Adams first winning (even though behind Jackson in popular votes), and then Jackson.

Presidential Elections of 1836 and 1840–Martin Van Buren vs William Henry Harrison, with Van Buren first winning, and then Harrison.

Presidential Elections of 1888 and 1892–Benjamin Harrison vs Grover Cleveland, with Harrison first winning (even though behind Cleveland in popular votes), and then Cleveland.

Presidential Election Of 1912–the only time three Presidents, past, present and future, ran against each other, with Woodrow Wilson defeating President William Howard Taft and former President Theodore Roosevelt (running on a third party line, the Progressive Party).

Presidential Election of 1932–Herbert Hoover vs Franklin D. Roosevelt, with FDR winning.

Presidential Election of 1960–John F. Kennedy vs Richard Nixon, with JFK winning, but Nixon later winning the Presidency in 1968.

Presidential Election of 1976–Jimmy Carter vs Gerald Ford, with Carter defeating President Ford.

Presidential Election of 1980–President Jimmy Carter vs Ronald Reagan, with Reagan defeating President Carter.

Presidential Election Of 1992–President George H. W. Bush vs Bill Clinton, with Clinton defeating President Bush.

Of these 20 Presidents, only Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton–a total of five–never lost to their Presidential competitor, although it could be pointed out that FDR lost the Vice Presidency in 1920, a race that Warren G. Harding won for the White House, and that Ronald Reagan lost the Republican nomination for President to Gerald Ford in 1976!

So another trivia contest for those who are interested!

The Issue Of Presidential Sexual Scandals And The Candidacy Of Newt Gingrich

The controversy surrounding former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich’s private life has multiplied, with the revelation by his second wife of Newt’s desire for an “open marriage”, so that he could carry on an affair with the woman who became his third wife, since his second wife disagreed with his desire for an open marriage. This issue arose when the second wife was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, just as the move by Newt to divorce his first wife came when she was diagnosed with cancer.

Have Presidential candidates and Presidents before now been involved in sex scandals? Of course, the answer is yes, but only becoming public knowledge and controversy in the past 25 years with the candidacies of Gary Hart, Bill Clinton, Rudy Guiliani, and Newt Gingrich, and the planned but aborted candidacies of Mark Sanford and John Ensign.

Have Presidents had affairs in the past, in or out of office? Of course yes is the answer, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Buchanan, James Garfield, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson, Warren G. Harding, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton, that we are aware of. But ONLY Bill Clinton was revealed to be involved in such scandals before he was elected, and during his Presidency, as news and gossip on other Presidents was kept well hidden from the news media and the general public.

Have Presidents or Presidential candidates ever been divorced? The answer is yes, although only Ronald Reagan has been elected. But Adlai Stevenson, Bob Dole, John Kerry, and John McCain all were married for the second time when they ran for the White House.

Has any candidate ever been married THREE times, and openly cheated on his first two wives, other than Newt Gingrich? The answer is NO, and the hypocrisy of Newt Gingrich is that he pursued the impeachment of Bill Clinton in 1998-1999 while pursuing his own affair outside of marriage.

No President or Presidential candidate has openly pursued the idea of a “open marriage”, although one could argue that Eleanor Roosevelt and Hillary Clinton, at the least, seemed to accept such a concept in the sense that they knew their husbands were involved in cheating and did not choose to break up their marriages.

Other First Ladies and wives of Presidential candidates MAY have silently agreed to their husbands committing adultery and staying married, but that is all speculation at best.

The point is that the second wife of Newt Gingrich, in revealing the “open marriage” idea of her former husband, made it clear that Newt had said that Callista, the third wife, had no problem with “sharing” Newt.

So what this means is that IF Callista Gingrich becomes First Lady, we will have the first acknowledged believer in an open marriage, who has no concept of a problem with adultery. In the past, there were choice words for such a woman, which will not be used here. It indicates the likelihood of an “open marriage” between Callista and Newt from the beginning of their marriage, and the excellent possibility that there would be sex scandals in the White House, something we do not need to occur, or to learn about.

In a country in which many “religious” people claim to believe in the sanctity of marriage, and the importance of “family values”, to have Newt and Callista Gingrich in the White House would be a mockery of the concept of marriage and loyalty, and a degradation of the Presidency as an institution.

And for conservatives, such as Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh to ignore this, and to support Newt, indicates the total hypocrisy of the Right, which was only too eager to remove Bill Clinton from office on moral grounds.