Shouldn't we talk about the overall net impact of his presidency rather than standalone policies?at the end of the day that's what matters
Still in Middle East, started wars, destabilized Libya, attempting to destabilize Syria, abetted criminal actions from Clinton, increased the deficit (and lowered it sometimes), increased debt substantially, historically low GDP/economy, massive racial tensions increased, ACA is a total failure and unconstitutional, and he lied on multiple occasions.Net wise he's waaaay in the negative. He would be the worst president of all time but history will rewrite his presidency the same way it rewrote FDR.
Would love to see the numbers behind these claims (I'm sure you know how deceiving numbers can be depending on how you measure them..) the realistic alternatives that another president would have taken for better results as well as comparison with the wider global economy and status e.g. debt increase vs deepening of financial crisis (US has been the best on the recovery), increase of racial tensions as the aftermath of wars in the ME (not his choice) and a global extremism trend etc.. So yes, things have not been great and it's easy to blame one person but when you put things into context and take into account the external factors and the limited number of alternatives, how better do you think he could be?
Watched a couple of other debates by Eli on here and he's always composed, factual and respectful. Great job.
Thank you, @aidennn_tv !