Is George W. Bush the worst president in 100 years?

[Illumina Drathiran'ar]

Originally posted by Felix The Assassin: quote: Originally posted by Illumina Drathiran'ar: Should we bring up the systematic alienation of our allies and making us as a nation look like one of swaggering idiots, then?

No, not at all. True allies support when support is needed. Others, well they go away and bury their head in the sand.[/QUOTE]I concur. They obviously felt we needed to make our own mistake in this scenario, or didn't support the sentiment of some in this country. That's different from abandoning us.

[Felix The Assassin]

Originally posted by Illumina Drathiran'ar: quote: Originally posted by Felix The Assassin: quote: Originally posted by Illumina Drathiran'ar: Should we bring up the systematic alienation of our allies and making us as a nation look like one of swaggering idiots, then?

No, not at all. True allies support when support is needed. Others, well they go away and bury their head in the sand.[/QUOTE]I concur. They obviously felt we needed to make our own mistake in this scenario, or didn't support the sentiment of some in this country. That's different from abandoning us. [/QUOTE]So true. If they would have abandoned us, then we would still have a larger force in Kosovo. The Bundeswher picked up a large portion of that mission for us, allowing us to focus on GWOT.

[wellard]

You guys are forgetting Bush senior .... (Yeah sorry to remind you of him)

While Bush Jr may be spending your money like a drunken sailor and have a foreign policy based on bombing allies and pissing of friendly countries and increasing oil profits, he at least achieves those goals with a singularity of purpose unequalled by any other president. With a friendly senate behind him he perhaps wont be able to take all the glory himself but to paraphrase (some village idiot) "George you’re doing a heck of a job".

[Balintherlas]

I do think that Bush is one of the worst presidents we've ever had,I mean all of his supporters are now trying to distance themselves from him for the next election, but we voted him in. Although it is nice to see so many post from those in other countries,it strengthens my belief that the US is stil a world leader.

[SpiritWarrior]

I don't get all these stories on the news about approval-ratings for Bush being at an all time low or being very low or just...low. These reports have been coming on the news and on the web for years boding ill about his reign as preident. It's not I don't believe them (they come up so often that I do) what I don't understand is, if his ratings have been and still are so low how did he get re-elected? This isn't a rhetorical question. I actually can't fathom that all these people who apparently didn't like him anymore ("Bush's approval rating dropped to 20% after the war in Iraq") went ahead and stuck him in there for another four years...

[shamrock_uk]

I believe it's because his approval ratings re Iraq fluctuated quite a lot. When there's good news, opinion polls go up (eg capture of important folks) and this happened before the election.

It's only since the election really that Iraq has fully started to disintegrate. He was still able to spin Iraq as being a success at the time of the election - it was a big job, but a job for a strong President determined to see it through. It appeals to the electorate.

It's easy to look back in hindsight, but back then most people didn't realise how impossible the task would be and were therefore easily swayed. Incidentally, Iraq is now ranked something like the fourth least viable state at the moment.

Besides, as happened in the UK as well, the election wasn't really decided on Iraq. The Pres was able to appear strong, consolidated his core supporters underneath him and as the economy was doing moderately well at the time people were quite content to let him continue.

Again, it's only really after the election has the Republican dissent become overt and events like Katriona happened to drag his ratings down more. Things just weren't this bad for him at the time of the election.

[ 05-04-2006, 08:04 AM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[Morgeruat]

Pretty good analysis Shamrock, there are also other categories of people who voted for Bush, those who were voting specifically against Kerry and his history (the folks the Swift Boat Vets were trying to reach) and those who wanted Bush in office to sink the republican ship for the next democrat (I know people who voted for Bush so that Hillary Clinton would have a viable shot at the oval office, rather than waiting 8 more years and then hoping they could keep a democrat in power, not very common historically).

[Timber Loftis]

Regarding the suggestion that GHWB was worse than GWB, I disagree. GHWB was pretty bright, actually fought in a war (Distinguished Flying Cross), visited scores of countries, and tried to steer toward a "Kinder, gentler nation."

GHWB did a war in the middle east in exactly the right way: for the right reason (a nation had invaded another), in the right way (warn, give an ultimatum, and then follow thru with crushing force). He beat the world's 6th Largest army, and only went as far as the law allowed (he did *not* occupy because his UN mandate was just to repel the invaders). GWB's revisiting the nation 10 years later for illegitimate reasons and kicking a downed dog, and then being totally unable to manage an occupied area to peace, is a pale, pale shadow of what his father did.

And, my biggest issue is always the environment. GHWB was not unfriendly to the environment -- he renewed protective laws and funded the EPA. GWB has been a vicious enemy of the environment, stripping the EPA of its money and staff, and being blatantly obviously and flagrantly buddy-buddy with the big polluters.

[shamrock_uk]

I've just stumbled across this article saying that the current Bush is siphoning power away from Congress in an unprecedented manner by signing the law but then altering it by the back door.

I'd be interested to know the validity of this. http://www.bugmenot.com for the privacy conscious who want to read page 3 onwards.

[DBear]

Originally posted by SpiritWarrior: what I don't understand is, if his ratings have been and still are so low how did he get re-elected? I actually can't fathom that all these people who apparently didn't like him anymore ("Bush's approval rating dropped to 20% after the war in Iraq") went ahead and stuck him in there for another four years...

That's easy. The Democrats went and nominated one of the few who could lose to W. When Kerry started running, I kept telling people that the Republicans COULDN'T get that lucky and have Kerry nominated... [img]graemlins/wow.gif[/img]