|
I think how you interpret his comment depends on how you define a successful Presidency.
Is a successful Presidency one in which we achieve peace but remain a super power? Have a growth economy and low unemployment rate with a decreasing national debt? Have a productive, healthy and (basically) happy population? And, if all of this is achieved, isn't it good for everybody, even if a liberal is the one who achieved it?
On the other hand, if you define a successful Presidency as one in which the President is able to implement all of his policies, whether the policies themselves make things better or not, then I can understand Rush's statement.
|