In particular parallels, Clinton anticipated the travails of the hapless Obama in that he ran on an economics agenda. The advantage for Clinton is that the basic soundness and work ethic of the American worker salvaged his plans. The difficulty for Obama is that he is ideologically far left-ward and the result has been disastrous. Clinton was savvy enough to adopt a workable Keynesian plan devised by policy wonks. Ideologically, there is no Bill Clinton; he would adopt anything that works.

The book really presages how Obama has attempted to manipulate data and the American people as a pragmatic reformer lifting the burden off the middle class. The Agenda documents how their public face is a sham. I would hope Woodward or others would examine the Obama White House with such clarity and honesty.

Woodward demonstrates how following the Cold War Congress represented the Soviets vs. current American president. A focus group noted that Clinton needed to co-exist with but not dominate the Soviets just as successive American presidents managed relations with their Cold War adversaries.

Working behind the scenes for the 18 months following Bill’s election, Bob Woodward has discovered how the Clinton White House really works. In The Agenda, he offers one of the most intimate portraits of a sitting president ever published, taking us not only to the highest level meetings, the hard-fought debates, and most difficult decisions but also to the very heart of this presidency — and of this man.

In a day-by-day, at times minute-by-minute account, President Clinton is shown debating, scolding, pleading, celebrating, and raging in anger and frustration. What emerges also is a group portrait of Clinton’s innermost circle of advisers in action — including his wife Hillary, Vice President Al Gore, Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen and the economic team, the White House staff, and outside political strategists.

Without ambiguity, the main point of "The Agenda" is that in the first year of his Administration, President Clinton fell absurdly short of the promise he made when, in accepting the Democratic Presidential nomination on July 16, 1992, he said, "George Bush, if you won't use your power to help people, step aside, I will." The next April the President was telling his staff with bitter sarcasm: "We're Eisenhower Republicans here, and we are fighting the Reagan Republicans. We stand for lower deficits and free trade and the bond market. Isn't that great?"

In light of the mainstream media‘s attacks upon President Trump Neil Ferguson has pointed out how close the agenda is similar to Trump’s program. If you take out Clinton and put in Trump you will see Trump’s populist vision of presidential economic activism similar to Clinton’s success.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8E1az6T4L20

Stanley Greenberg describes why President Trump won and why Hillary the candidate lost:

https://www.greenbergresearch.com/his-thinking/2017/9/21/how-she-lost

Woodward not at his finest but still a great look at the inner workings of the White House in the Clinton administration

2653 The Agenda: Inside the Clinton White House, by Bob Woodward (read 2 Oct 1994) This tells the inside story of Clinton dealing with economic issues, concentrating on the 1993 battle over the budget plan. In general, the book presents Clinton in a fairly affirmative light, though he appears to have an anger control problem. If I did not disagree with him so fundamentally over abortion I could support him, since he is far more attuned to the people's welfare than is somebody like Phil Gramm or Bob Dole. This was interesting though ephemeral reading. ( )

Interesting. I like BobWoodward but I am always trying to figure out what Bob Woodward really thinks since he writes so even handed. Why does everyone talk to him. Same with Bob Novack (just read his memoir). ( )