This article about a poll indicating that the vast majority of so-called historians have already judged the Bush presidency a failure doesn't give one confidence in the profession of history instruction.

No, academia isn't biased at all...

Hey, I can be a historian too: I declare the Hillary Clinton presidency a complete failure!

Well, the idiot who wrote that article argued that Bush has been the worst for the economy since Hoover.

That idiots historical experience must omit the peroid from Jan 20, 1977 to Jan 20, 1981 and the word 'stagflatioon' must also not be in his vocabulary.

For anyone to argue the economy is not far better now that it was under the Carter Asministration would require a full frontal lobotomy.

I lived thru those years old enough to understand how badly they sucked.

'Stagflation' is obviously not in your spell checker...

Mike, could you point out specifically which of Carter policies was so bad for the economy? He did appoint Paul Volcker, who did terminate stagflation by engineering the Slap-In-The-Face recession of `82.

Duncan:

Yes, Carter appointed Volcker---after first appointing G. William Miller, who believed in a far more inflationary approach (and was opposed by Vice Chair Volcker).

Miller, along w/ James Tobin, who chaired the President's Council of Economic Advisors (and who was in turn selected by Jimmy) was one of those who believed that inflation was not a bad thing.

And while most Presidents cannot do much about the economy, good or bad, one of the few things they can do is appoint the Fed Chairman, who either is pro-inflation (Carter's first choice, appointed 1978) or anti-inflation (Volcker, mid-1979).

So, Carter, by way of his appointments, helped create and deepen the stagflationary conditions of 1977-1981.

It is a SELF-SELECTED "poll." In other words, the people most likely to respond are those who have an axe to grind about the subject. In fact, we don't even know how the poll was distributed in the first place, only that it was "informal" and "unscientific." It could have been sent to gender and ethnic studies historians, for instance.

So this cannot be used to say anything about the history profession. It's a crap "poll." Don't fall for it.

Well, I for one remember sitting in the car in a line to get to the gas station in the late 70s, "even/odd" license plate days, and gas stations that were actually out of gas at times. My dad had a friend who would come borrow our even-numbered plates on even days and swap them out for his odd-numbered plates. Heh.

The gas price may be much higher now, but I can still go to the gas station and buy some, and there are no lines down the street.

I'm not blaming Carter or giving credit to Bush, I'm just reminding everyone. :-)

Not to mention the Soviets rolling up much of sub-saharan Africa and Afghanistan under Carters watch.

....as well as that whole Iran debacle......

Clearly, a resonable person can also conclude Carter's foreign policy sucked worse than his economic policy and makes Bush's foreign policy look positively Trumanesque by comparison.

Mike Puckett touches on an important point:

The Carter Administration allowed itself to be held hostage. The idea that Carter couldn't/wouldn't leave the WH until the hostages were released was awful, not least for the economy, b/c what the economy values, more than anything else, is stability (aka predictability). This is also why inflation is bad (it makes calculating future values and rates very difficult).

So, by allowing Iran to fester for 444 days, Carter effectively undermined the confidence of both business and consumers as to the future---leading to poorer conditions for the economy to operate under.

Not a direct problem (not like, say, nationalizing the coal mines or somesuch), but an indirect contribution.

Not to mention the energy policy.

Nothing wrong with declaring energy policy "moral equivalent of war", but how did he actually run that "war"? Carter killed breeder reactors and recycling of plutonium, and cut the funds for fusion research. IOW, he dismantled heavy divisions right away. Then he called for everyone to turn down the thermostats and put on sweaters. IOW, he saw the "war" as already lost, and US' goal was to minimize the losses.

He was also the first President to tell us that out best days were behind us and we should stop dreaming big dreams.

In his Inaugral.

Yup, tell everybody things will get worse and set up an energy policy that is an attempt to make it true. The guy didn't understand economics and pushed regulation, price controls and government programs rather than allowing economic incentives open up new resources. And as already mentioned, actually REDUCED research and development in promising energy options.

Carter was such a fool. He was a nice guy, but a terrible president.