I suspect that would be true in a brief history of the US, but not in a detailed, multi-volume history of the US (nor in a dedicated history of the Supreme Court).
Roger Taney is one of the most (in)famous SCOTUS justices in US history, largely for his role in the Dred Scott decision. I suspect he’d rank near the top of justices famous/important for what he did as justice, as opposed to being famous just for being a justice.
I expect nobody at all will be talking about Obama’s legacy at all in 15 years, unless you count Presidents Biden, Trump, and Harris as his legacy. His mostly small-ball accomplishments will be overshadowed by everything that happened afterward.
Since this is compare and contrast, I am focusing on US history in toto. Not individual volumes based on a particular president or particular issues.
With Dred Scott, or something like Jim Crow, they will be mentioned for the impact they had on people. As well as the fight against them. Jackie Robinson is more likely to be mentioned than Roger Taney, because Taney’s cause lost.
So I am looking at a general history, in which presidents and politics play a role, and also the wider sweep, issues affecting the common person.
I’m reading a book, The Last 100 Days, about the conclusion of WWII in Europe. Hitler is featured, as well as Mussolini, Stalin, Churchill, FDR/Truman, generals, and more minor figures. Hitler was the leader of Germany, but he didn’t control every incident in the country, and other equally strong forces were at work against him. So if you’re going to write a general history of the time, focusing on Hitler in the bunker to the exclusion of other events isn’t accurate. People lived and died during that time without ever meeting Hitler.
With Trump, his fascist elements I think tend to inflate his historical impact. Fascism does that, it feels like the end of history and the dawn of a new age. In reality, fascism tends to die out when the charismatic leader dies, and people wake up and the world marches on. So it comes down to what Trump has actually done, what has he impacted? I’ve mentioned COVID numerous times, that is the story of 2020-2021 way beyond Donald Trump.
In a comparison of Stalin with Hitler, Stalin is likely the greater figure. He ruled longer, more effectively (from his own standpoint), his policies lasted longer. Hitler maybe only in killing people per year, and Stalin did plenty of killing as well. So responsible historians shouldn’t boost Hitler ahead of Stalin just because he’s a more juicy subject to write about in their opinion.
So down the road, with Trump dead and Trumpism equally dead, historians need to look back and assess the impact. Some presidents won’t be mentioned much. Bill Clinton maybe not at all. Writing about the 1990s, focus on the Internet and economic changes. Clinton’s impeachment probably left out if that’s the only thing you’re going to write about him. W had several momentous events during his terms, but really only with the Iraq War is he absolutely essential to telling the story. Obama, first black president is a huge mention, despite how much it’s really being downplayed here. Trump, again, show the impact. Even if America turns into a totalitarian state, that’s going to be done by someone else who builds his own image owing nothing to Trump.
In 50 years? They will probably talk more about Trump if only because of all the disruption in his Presidency(COVID 19, the “disputed” election, the January 6 uprising). Also it will depend greatly on how the Republican Party and conservative movement in the US develops from this point forward. If his brand of conspiracy based ideology becomes a permanent fixture his importance will go up/
As far people saying Trump will be forgotten, it will take more than 50 years for that to happen.
500 years from now? Trump will mostly be forgotten about particularly among the masses. I can’t think of any argument that Trump is a major historical figure significant of remembering on the same lines as Hitler or Stalin or Lincoln or FDR. And honestly I am not sure Obama or any other living President would qualify as a “major” historical figure.
Look at this way. Which relationship would people remember and talk about more: A nice but boring person who went with you to dinners and movies but nothing particular ever happened, or a wild crazed partner who screamed at you for hours at 2 A.M., was always drunk or on drugs, and was three hundred thousand dollars in debt?
Well, first of all high school history books are often poor quality whitewashes that I hope are not the judge of this contest.
Neither Obama nor Trump’s stories are over. Obama can be counted upon to support the Biden Administration, and Biden may well take the offer if Obama can do something he can’t. But even after doing this, it’s hard to draw the conclusion that Obama is an above average president, not an exceptional one.
50 years is an important benchmark–the young people of our time will be elderly but alive. Their lives are shaped by the actions and reactions of these administrations, just as people today speak of the Space Race, Cold War, and Vietnam.
Obama reflects a historic first in being the first black president. Obamacare obviously is tied to him, but other policies–Dodd Frank, LGBT Rights, The GM Bailout, Renouncing first use of nuclear weapons–could have long histories and consequences. Obama would also have a presidential library in Chicago, and probably have a generation of new faces that started with his administration; its clear that Obama’s supporters will continue to have a large audience into the Biden administration, and it’s quite possible that Obama is eclipsed by greater achievements or that he is the greatest success of his time.
Donald Trump will have no library, no foundation, and a dark legacy, one that immediately brings about a long stain. Two impeachments, the coup attempt, Covid 19. Although it’s a hundred years ago, the Flu outbreak of 1917 still haunts our world. Trump has never had majority support so much as he has extreme supporters, and I wonder if redhatters might someday replace swastikas as the sign of authoritarian power. I suspect that the Redhatters are far from done–they are many and they may simply drift further into extremism. That Trump himself could come under serious consequences for these excesses goes to show how little we know of Trump’s post-presidency.
It’s very early to tell, but I think more people are going to be angry and embittered by Donald Trump than excited for Barack Obama. Historians 50 years in the future will have ample knowledge of both but that knowledge would be much more about the damning truths of Donald Trump versus the quiet competence of Barack Obama.
Predicting the future is hard. The question may hinge on events that are pure speculation–but I think it comes down to idealism versus sensationalism. Nero and Caligula were deranged Roman Emperors, but they better known by many than Trajan or Tiberius. And it makes sense; one of the men has dedicated his life to public service and the other to public attention, which one is going to get the headlines?
For all of this, I say Trump.
I think you as well as others are completely minimizing the massive impact of the first black President. Obama was not merely a nice but boring person who you hung out with a bunch. But, what if he was the first black friend you had. I’d imagine he’d get brought up quite a bit - especially when a discussion of racism came up.
FWIW, I have had a friend who were a complete mess (maybe not that much in debt, but definitely always owing money, always drunk, always doing dumb shit). I almost never talk about him and have basically wrote him off. I talk about my good and respectful friends to others a whole lot more.
Has your friend ever tried to burn down your house or steal your car? I bet you’d talk about him more if he did.
I’d probably talk about him less and/or write him off earlier. Our friend group tried to salvage the friendship even after he literally stole from another friend of mine. Was a mistake.
I’m not trying to underplay Obama. I think he was an admirable president and his election was a major event that will be remembered.
It’s just that I think Trump was evil, racist and authoritarian. He was unlike any other US president and caused grievous damage to democracy and the rule of law. He will be discussed for a long time.
On a long enough timeline I think Obama being the first black president will become as noteworthy as JFK being the first catholic president.
None. There will be no mention of the actual presidential activities of Johnson and Clinton but they’ll absolutely be mentioned because of impeachment. That discussion will also include Trump.
The reasons for Johnson’s and Clinton’s impeachments will be covered in one or two paragraphs but it will be the discussion of “how in the world do you get impeached TWICE?” that, IMO, will springboard into an account of the unique thuggery of the Trump administration culminating with the Epiphany (Jan. 6) and WTF? Did a US president just incite insurrection?
Unless POTUS-led coup attempts become an everyday thing (which as bad as things are, I don’t think will be happening any time soon) the Epiphany will loom large in future tellings of US history.
Especially once a woman gets elected president, and a Hispanic is president, and someone else is president. Or maybe when Kamala becomes president, who is both a woman and black.
Obama being the first black president would be pretty diluted an achievement then.
Part of what I’m going on is my memory of history classes. It seemed to me that, of the modern era stuff, we stayed focused on Watergate more than anything else. It wasn’t a lot, since the modern stuff took up little of the book, and even less time was actually spent teaching it. But it was enough that everyone I know remembers Nixon, and not necessarily the other presidents around him (besides Kennedy since he was shot).
Trump is now the replacement for Nixon as the worst president, having far more and worse scandals. I don’t see those not being mentioned, even if the narrative is “see what we did to get away from him.” People will still be angry at him in 50 years unless someone worse comes along.
Because all the black baseball players that came after Jackie Robinson just led to Robinson being ignored from the baseball history books 
.
On a side note, I just finished watching PBS’s fantastic documentary “The Black Church”. They only talked about two US Presidents in any detail in the 4 hour documentary: Abraham Lincoln and Barack Obama.
Pretty much every sport, vocation, public sector office, etc has had a ‘first black person’ at this point.
We all know who Jackie Robinson was, but how many people know without googling it who the first black senator was? The first black NBA player, the first black governor, first black CEO, first black mayor, first black FBI agent?
In a lot of ways its a good thing because it shows society just accepts out-groups obtaining positions of power.
Being President of the United States is a much more high-profile job than any of the ones you listed.
Indeed, the highest position in the country. Akin to being the first black person in the country’s most popular sport (fwiw, baseball was so big back then that most fans even know the second black baseball player, Larry Doby, the first black player in the American League, as Robinson played in the National League).
Yes true. But hopefully years and years from now after we’ve had multiple non-white presidents, female presidents, trans presidents, atheist presidents, muslim presidents the public will just take having out-group presidents as a non controversial issue.
But other than the first black president and first black MLB player, I don’t think most people know the first black XYZ other than them because as a society we’ve more or less gotten used to non-whites being able to achieve positions of status and power.
It does happen. Being a Catholic was a major issue when John Kennedy and Al Smith ran for President. But it was not a major issue for Joe Biden, Newt Gingrich, John Kerry, Rick Santorum, or a number of others since 1960.
But that’s the point of history. It tells us about how things were and how they changed. Just because anti-catholicism has pretty much disappeared in this country, it’s still a valid topic to be discussed in an American history class.