Stimulus was nice but it was started under Bush.

Healthcare reform has turned into a dud. It was an okay improvement but since it hasn't been built on at all it's a dead-end policy that didn't lead to better prospects. If Biden passed a public option or single payer, then Obama would have overwhelmingly got credit for setting the groundwork, but that's not going to happen.

historically in sources ive read the "ball rolling" actions of presidents that are later largely expanded is more of a minor bump to their score rather than defining aspect. we're just in an era where Obamacare seems like a major achievement, give it time and the eventual system that replaces it will leave Obama with just a score bump imo. That doesn't mean it wasn't an insanely hard achievement, especially given that he was in office for 6 years without a mandate.

I'm personally less interested in president's as people for their score, and was talking mostly legislation.

Obama, Biden, Trump, etc they're all plagued by EOs being their main tool to do anything in office. It's unfair to them that they can't get things done in a way, but it does hurt their score in the longrun. Trump by extension got almost nothing done. His scorecard will read "moved embassy in Israel", "changed lanes in North Korean policy and learned why it was a bad idea", "started trade war with China that was undone by next potus without Chinese concessions", etc. All minor gains and losses, he was largely a loud lame duck.

Obama's stimulus was also noteworthy, and included Republican-supported tax cuts, even though they wouldn't vote for the bill. I don't know enough about economics to be sure how necessary it was, but neither do the historians.

Historians look at Obama passing healthcare as a great leap forward and then the pesky conservatives who always oppose progress weakened it. That makes way for the next big historical story, full blown Berniecare.

I agree with your statement. The irony on lack of acknowledgement from some I find absurd. Simply the reason I’m more direct towards a member or two here on this forum.

fair enough, that's not unwarranted at times.

I think we're all probably talking about something we're not that knowledgeable in, but my guess is historians would grade on a curve if Obama and Trump were living in hyperpartisan times.

im not trained in history, but "rank the presidents" videos are a semi recurring thing i watch. i just like when people rank things. and ive read a few books on Presidents up to WW2, mainly because i realized one day there's like 20 presidents whom i couldnt say a single fact about, they're just lost to history.

Worth mentioning that historians obviously have a major progressive leaning.

100%, it's rare that they give people kudos for rolling things back or staying the conservative course. and many times are quick to take agency away from presidents who simply sign into law policy that's popular or veto proof but not driven by that Potus, like LBJ and the civil rights movement.