Why we shouldn't idolize the president

But the issue goes beyond that, to a willful ignorance of history. No one schmoozed more or better with legislators in both parties than Clinton. How many Republican votes did it get him on his signature initial priority, an economic plan? Zero in both houses.... No one defined the agenda or negotiated more brilliantly than Reagan. Did he "work his will"? On almost every major issue, he had to make major compromises with Democrats, including five straight years with significant tax increases....

Indeed, the theme of presidential arm-twisting again ignores history. Clinton once taught Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama a lesson, cutting out jobs in Huntsville, Ala. That worked well enough that Shelby switched parties, joined the Republicans, and became a reliable vote against Clinton. George W. Bush and Karl Rove decided to teach Sen. Jim Jeffords a lesson, punishing dairy interests in Vermont. That worked even better — he switched to independent status and cost the Republicans their Senate majority. Myths are so much easier than reality. [National Journal]

What's more, mythologizing the president leads to letting him off the hook for those things he really can and should be held responsible for... whether it's appointing judges and executive branch officials or managing the bureaucracy..... False assumptions about presidential magic can get presidents unfairly criticized for not getting Congress or the bureaucracy to do whatever he wants — while at the same time preventing a careful look at just how well he actually bargained, given the real context and constraints he was working under.

Mythical presidents with magical powers are tempting. But they're not really democratic, and at any rate they're not real. We can do better on this one, folks. [Washington Post]