What did Clinton do that would qualify him for great? Honestly, from where I'm sitting, what did Clinton do that set him apart from any other President at all?
And Tony Blair? A head of state that was just seen as a puppet of another as 'almost great'?
I won't argue that Clinton was great like JFK, or even Reagan, but when fishing for great Western leaders of the past thirty years is there anyone else who comes out better?
Blair on the other hand led the reformation of the Labour party and made them electable again, whilst mainaining Britain's standing on the world stage, far from a puppet actually.
>I won't argue that Clinton was great like JFK, or even Reagan, but when fishing for great Western leaders of the past thirty years is there anyone else who comes out better?
Better by comparison is not the same as great. It is quite possible that there be no great leaders. I do not know of anything Clinton did that would be great.
>Blair on the other hand led the reformation of the Labour party and made them electable again, whilst mainaining Britain's standing on the world stage, far from a puppet actually.
Making a party electable again may be a sign of a savvy leader, but it is not greatness. Britian's standing on the world stage under Blair was one of a lapdog in many circles. Again, a leader that garners the reputation as a puppet is not a great leader.
And Tony Blair? A head of state that was just seen as a puppet of another as 'almost great'?