We revisit Henderson and Gochenour’s (2013) research on the link between presidential greatness rankings and war intensity—expanding it with additional historical data and control variables. We find that since 2000 historians tend to reward presidents overseeing intense wars, whereas this effect is weaker in mid-to-late twentieth-century assessments. This discrepancy suggests a shift in historical perspectives on presidential greatness related to war intensity.
This full text of this article will be available on this page nine months after its initial print publication. To read it now, please buy this issue in print or downloadable eBook & PDF format, or in the Independent Review app on iOS or Android, or on Magzter which offers digital access on smartphones, tablets, and web browsers.
is an Assistant Professor of Economics at Metropolitan State University. His research focuses on analyzing the effects of government policy including those of the Department of Defense and the Department of Education.
