Are presidents overrated?

We have an unhealthy obsession with presidents as the sole movers of American politics.

For too long, Americans have understood history primarily through the lens of the presidency. School textbooks and media accounts all suggest that everything that is good and bad can be understood as the result of a president’s skill, personal foibles and decision-making ability.

If only President Bill Clinton, who critics called “Slick Willie,” wasn’t so willing to sell out traditional Democratic principles! If only President George W. Bush had a better understanding of the complexity of foreign affairs! If only President Barack Obama would be more willing to wheel and deal on Capitol Hill! Lyndon Johnson is the prime example of a president who has received both kinds of treatment, the person whose legendary political skill is held responsible for the Great Society and the villain who single-handedly dragged the nation into the quagmire of Vietnam.

It is understandable why we focus so much attention on the president. After all, the president is powerful. Just as important, there is a simplicity to the presidency — he is a single person, elected every four to eight years, and through his story, we can tell a clear narrative about the complicated processes of politics. There is a dramatic arc that can be used to describe the career of a president that serves as a crutch for many journalists and historians, lending itself to more exciting accounts of what happens in Washington than someone who digs deeper into the trenches of the messy political process.

Read CNNOpinion’s new Flipboard magazine.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion.

CNN