I was thinking about the that same JEDI question a few weeks ago when Bush Senior was in the hospital.
At this point in time, Bush Senior is 88.5 years of age, and as such has lived well beyond mean male life expectancy. And given what Bush Senior was hospitalized for recently, it certainly hints at the probability his remaining life span may be limited. Bush Senior bounced back this time, and may the next and the next time, but usually the progression of repository failure proves fatal in the end.
But when the thread question becomes, how will any given individual remember Bush Senior, we already have examples of those. But I ask the maybe more important, how will historians regard his presidency, not just shortly after his death, but 50 years later?
As for me, even as a partisan democrat, its difficult to summon real lasting dislike for Bush Senior, and when American really needed reality, Bush Senior was an American Patriot, was able to put America ahead of partisan politics. As the word pragmatic, while maybe accurate, does not include the courage it took. Still Bush Senior made plenty of mistakes, especially in bungling how to handle the aftermath of Gulf War 1.
As for the question, could have Bush Senior have won re-election in 11/1992? While it may be easy to blame loss on Perot, or many other factors. Insert your opinion here____________________________.
As for me I somewhat blame the loss on Bush senior's dislike of playing partisan politics and the Peter Principle. Because after Bush Senior brilliantly put together the coalition of the willing in Iraq, he looked unbeatable in 11/92. But still, with the dems still controlling both houses of congress, I believe Bush Senior had an inherent distaste for wading into the ring, and having bare knuckle partisan brawls over the budget where the odds were low. As instead Bush senior shifted his focus to American foreign relations
that he was not only more happy doing, it was also a job that better fitted his temperament. Oh well, that is my pet theory for part of why Bush Senior lost in 11/1992.
But what about what amounts to the permanent legacy of the period from 11/1988 to 11/2000. Even if Bill Clinton gets much of the credit for the economic improvement during the period, I see little difference between either of their economic policies. Nor will I accuse either Bush Senior or Bill Clinton of brilliant economic leadership or policies.
As I will advocate my theory here, in why Bush Senior started the economic recovery Clinton got the credit for. As I maintain neither Bush Senior or Clinton were brilliant, but on the other hand neither of them did anything really really stupid. And in America, at least until the dawn of the new century we are already a decade into, forgetting to do anything really really stupid puts any recent President into a hall of fame. As it now takes at least a decade for America to recover from the really really stupid President.
Meanwhile I still wish Bush Senior a long life, and secure in the knowledge that he will never be anywhere near the bottom 10 Presidents in US history.