The consequences behind an American presidency is largely determined by the individuals who are elected to that position, not the time in which they are elected. My reasoning for this stems from the fact that the “success” of a presidency almost entirely relies on how the individuals utilize the tools at their disposal. I will briefly touch on the pro argument for this debate, which argues that the political environment is the primary factor in regard to a president’s performance, and briefly explain its importance. Then, I will rationalize my reasoning as to why it is the individuals who define the presidency, not the environment.

Touching on the importance of the political environment, it certainly does play an important factor that will help determine the success or failure of a presidency. The environment sets up the foundation for which the president will act on. If it is a time of extreme political turmoil, the president could very well have a harder time being successful, but they are not without control of the situation. To simply say that a presidency can be defined from the moment they take office is way too much of a stretch, in my opinion, and it fosters an environment where presidents are not held accountable for their actions. I also take issue with the definitions placed on the environment of American presidencies, such as Jeffersonian democracy between 1800-1828. While these eras mark a sort of political trend that dominates American politics, it does not take into account the overall complex, perhaps short term, issues that arise during one’s presidency. Such issues are almost entirely in the control of the president. But in order for the president to be successful, they must take the proper individual steps that lead to it. While I do believe individual skill and leadership capabilities are key factors that will help define success, not having those skills will almost certainly doom a presidency. Taking the example of dysfunctional and deficient presidents that Paul highlights, we can see that these individuals will have the most trouble in office regardless of the political environment. At the end of the day, it is the competency level of an individual that will define an administration’s success, as those competencies will directly contribute to the strategy of the individual who will then utilize the proper tools to achieve their goals. The political environment provides the framework for policy making, while individual competency will provide the framework to achieve strategy.