Bush: The Stupidest Modern President?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
267

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
Hillary? Yeah, I agree with what you’re saying. But if the Democrats get their shit together, I don’t think Republicans with viewpoints and policies substantially similar to Bush’s will win.[/quote]

The Dems are funded from the left. The far left. A democratic candidate can’t run as a “lower taxes, lower spending” moderate, and get any traction with the purse strings.

The republicans have to cut spending, balance the budget, and run as conservatives. They do that and they will win. The democrats have no ground to stand on, and they will revert back to their tried and tired scare tactics and class envy.

Look at the recent race in Ohio - the guy from the left never once mentioned that he was a democrat. He wrapped himself in the flag, and pretended to be the biggest Bush supporter on the planet. He lost.

Voters are smarter than the left wants them to be. They can sense a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Or in this case a liberal trying to act red.

268

[quote]vroom wrote:
Who is stupid?

Is that a trick question? Maybe the general public?[/quote]

I hope the left continues to share this elitist attitude. As their support base shrinks smaller and smaller as they whore themselves out further and further to the left, the republicans stand ready and waiting to welcome the disillusioned right-center of the democrats.

So please tell all of your liberal friends to keep on thinking that the general public is too stupid to realize what is good for them. But sooner, or later the elite left will be standing in the unemployment line hoping that one of those stupid voters will give them a job.

269

Zzzzz.

Spare me the talking points. You should realize that some things are actually just funny…

270

[quote]rainjack wrote:

But sooner, or later the elite left will be standing in the unemployment line hoping that one of those stupid voters will give them a job. [/quote]\

Is it any coincidence that the only place the leftist elite can hold down steady work is in academia, where there is the privilege of tenure?

271

[quote]vroom wrote:

Spare me the talking points. You should realize that some things are actually just funny…[/quote]

Vroom, what exactly are ‘talking points’?

This seems to be your favorite new retort for anyone offering a viewpoint conrary to your own.

And it is hollow as it is redundant.

272

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
vroom wrote:

Spare me the talking points. You should realize that some things are actually just funny…

Vroom, what exactly are ‘talking points’?

This seems to be your favorite new retort for anyone offering a viewpoint conrary to your own.

And it is hollow as it is redundant.

[/quote]

You left out “zzzzzzz”, and “funny”, Thunder.

273

[quote]vroom wrote:
I hope the left continues to share this elitist attitude. As their support base shrinks smaller and smaller as they whore themselves out further and further to the left, the republicans stand ready and waiting to welcome the disillusioned right-center of the democrats.

Zzzzz.

Spare me the talking points. You should realize that some things are actually just funny…[/quote]

Please, keep snoozing and laughing. It only makes the right’s takeover of the country even easier.

And it’s already pretty easy.

274

[quote]rainjack wrote:

The republicans have to cut spending, balance the budget, and run as conservatives. [/quote]

Perhaps. That in itself would be a big departure from Bush.

276

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
vroom wrote:
I hope the left continues to share this elitist attitude. As their support base shrinks smaller and smaller as they whore themselves out further and further to the left, the republicans stand ready and waiting to welcome the disillusioned right-center of the democrats.

Zzzzz.

Spare me the talking points. You should realize that some things are actually just funny…

Please, keep snoozing and laughing. It only makes the right’s takeover of the country even easier.

And it’s already pretty easy.

I think you are being too optimistic here. George II polls are down. Say what you will- he might not listen to that, but Rove will. And bad numbers influence the entire party.

The Iraq War is not going well, and the majority of the public believes it was a mistake. I know others will say that it is going well- but the public thinks otherwise. And I daresay that they don’t pay as much attention to politics as us on this site go- conservative or liberal. They see what the great brainwasher of TV shows them,and it isn’t a nice thing.

Social secutrity has died on the Republicans. The ANWR drilling has died. Gas prices are higher. 45 million people still don’t have healthcare. Things haven’t changed much. There is no exit strategy for Iraq, whether it is to be tommorow or in ten years- there is no word of any plan. The basis for the war is being questioned more and more- and by the same prics that voted for it. Now I just read that Keane and others who were doing that terrorism study (not sure if it was a commision, but it had 5 Repubs and 5 Democrats) says that the administration is really paying attention the terrorist threat, their attention is elsewhere. Might not affect you Texas guys, but that irritates us in the tri state area, as we got hit the hardest once, and now they aren’t paying attention if it happens again.

And how many republicans got indicted this term, or resigned, or are under investigation?

I can’t understand how you guys think that everything is going to be fine for the right. I’m not saying the Democrats will fare much better- but it is starting to seem like they are the “lesser of the two evils” as everyone likes to say.

It will show in the midterm elections. It will really show in 2008, when everyone has to find a new candidate to run. I don’t know who will take over, but I don’t think it is going to be a Republican congress + president again. I think they blew that shot pretty well.[/quote]

Let’s do a quick math lesson okay? what is 2008 minus 2005? Bingo - 3 years.

Even today, the dems can’t put up a winner against any republican candidate. Polls showed that the worst one would be COndi Rice v. Hilary at a dead heat.

The thing is - no matter how crappy the left wants things to be for the right, the left is doing worse.

But you guys keep on preaching about Bush. Have coffee with vroom, and laugh and joke. Get that warm fuzzy feeling knowing that GDub 's numbers are at 43% three years out from an election that he is not even participating in. But just be ready for another round of agonizing defeats - starting in about a year.

277

[quote]Professor X wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

I would prefer being remembered as a good president who made wise, well thought-out choices and executed them well. Which I don’t think he will be. Time will tell and afford more objectivity.

I agree with this. I seriously doubt the history books 50 years from now will read, “But hey, he beat the democrats!!!”.[/quote]

At very least, his administration will provide much heartier fare for Bartlett’s Quotations than his predecessor. I believe there are only three listings for President Clinton:

“It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.”

“I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.”

“I tried marijuana once. I did not inhale.”

Whereas Dubya is good for pages and pages!

My favorite so far:

“There’s an old saying in Tennessee…I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee…that says, fool me once, shame on…shame on you. Fool me…you can’t get fooled again.”

With all due respect to the Chief, some things, as vroom says, are just funny.

278

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
My favorite so far:

“There’s an old saying in Tennessee…I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee…that says, fool me once, shame on…shame on you. Fool me…you can’t get fooled again.”

With all due respect to the Chief, some things, as vroom says, are just funny.[/quote]

I have seen that video clip about 500 times and I cry every time.

But just to be clear - vroom’s definition of funny is not the same thing as laughing at Presidential guffaws.

279

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Professor X wrote:
jsbrook wrote:

I would prefer being remembered as a good president who made wise, well thought-out choices and executed them well. Which I don’t think he will be. Time will tell and afford more objectivity.

I agree with this. I seriously doubt the history books 50 years from now will read, “But hey, he beat the democrats!!!”.

At very least, his administration will provide much heartier fare for Bartlett’s Quotations than his predecessor. I believe there are only three listings for President Clinton:

“It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.”

“I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky.”

“I tried marijuana once. I did not inhale.”

Whereas Dubya is good for pages and pages!

My favorite so far:

“There’s an old saying in Tennessee…I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee…that says, fool me once, shame on…shame on you. Fool me…you can’t get fooled again.”

With all due respect to the Chief, some things, as vroom says, are just funny.[/quote]

Guaranteed to provide material for future SNL casts for decades to come. The next candidate offered by the Republicans had better be able to speak well in public. I doubt that will be accepted very well ever again.

280

[non sequitur]

Some turkeys will do anything for a Presidential pardon.

…either that or the turkey wanted an intern position and hadn’t heard the administration had changed.

[/non sequitur]

281

Worst President or worst public relations president. The man is the only politician in the history of our country who doesnt like being in front of a microphone. Best presidents Reagan, Clinton (although i hate him),
and Nixon (master of foreign affairs). Worst - JFK. Charisma of a president out the ass, but in an era of historical oppurtunity he accomplished very little. Taking into account his assasination.

Jeb in 2008!!!

282

[quote]dean12345 wrote:
Worst President or worst public relations president. The man is the only politician in the history of our country who doesnt like being in front of a microphone. Best presidents Reagan, Clinton (although i hate him),
and Nixon (master of foreign affairs). Worst - JFK. Charisma of a president out the ass, but in an era of historical oppurtunity he accomplished very little. Taking into account his assasination.

Jeb in 2008!!! [/quote]

I give GWB a hard time but i like Nixon too. If he didnt get involved in that watergate stuff he would be in the top 25% of presidents IMO

283

There are two nightmare scenarios for 2008.

  1. The US is still in Iraq.

  2. The US is not in Iraq, but Iraq has descended into civil war.

Now, there are certainly other scenarios, but if victory is redeclared and the US gets out only to have Iraq collapse, or if victory is not redeclared, then you can kiss your republican dynasty goodbye for a while.

No amount of political spin will be able to avoid that. This is what I was trying to say when the president was talking about “victory”. Instead of attacking the president via partisanship I was trying to say he’s created two easy options for electing a democrat.

However, it is still possible for the democrats to have nothing to offer. Either that or stupid negative attack politics could save the day I suppose, sadly.

285

[quote]dean12345 wrote:
The man is the only politician in the history of our country who doesnt like being in front of a microphone. [/quote]

How many years back do you think “the history of our country” spans?

As far as I know, none of the presidents from Washington to Harding spent too much time in front of microphones, either. :wink:

Useless but slightly humorous trivia:

The first candidate to use radio broadcasts in his presidential campaign was Calvin Coolidge, whose nickname was, of course, “Silent Cal”.

Fill in your own punchline.

286

[quote]jsbrook
12/06/05
06:27 PM
Pennsylvania, USA

Zeb, forget about intelligence. Forget about liberals and competition too. You think Bush is a good president? You think he’ll go down in history as one? [/quote]

Forget about intelligence? But what about the name of the thread?

Okay, it’s forgotten about (for now).

Not one person on this thread can know how Bush will fare in comparison to other Presidents. He has three years to go and anything can happen.

If Iraq is successful (and I think it will be), and the economy keeps cranking President Bush will go down in history as a very successful President.

Anyone who posts current poll numbers when speaking of a Bush legacy, is either so partisan that he cannot see beyond his nose. Or, so young and foolish that he has not been around long enough to see how easily poll numbers can be turned.

Is it even realistic to make a claim that because current poll numbers are down that Bush will someday be ranked low in comparison to other Presidents?

It simply makes no sense!

Harry Truman was one of America’s least popular Presidents. His poll numbers were quite low during the last few years of his Presidency. If you check you will see that he is now considered one of the better modern day Presidents. He is certainly not ranked anywhere near the low end of the Presidential spectrum by any credible historian.

287

[quote]vroom wrote:
Now, there are certainly other scenarios, but if victory is redeclared and the US gets out only to have Iraq collapse, or if victory is not redeclared, then you can kiss your republican dynasty goodbye for a while.
[/quote]

This is a myth that the left must think has taken root outside the beltway. We will not have to ‘redeclare’ victory. The victory that was declared was that of victory over the Hussein regime. He is no longer in power. He was defeated. We won.

The next victory that will be declared will be when the Iraqis are no longer in need of coalition forces to help maintain peace in the country.

Bush said himslf that the War on Terror was going to be a long one. Some estimates have put this at as much as 30 years - quite a bit more time than the current video game mentatlity of the anti-war crowd.

But all of that being said. I don’t see 2008 as a referendum on the war like it was in 2004.

Just my opinion.

288

The war on terror will be a VERY long one. The reason being is that we can’t defeat the terrorist MENTALITY with force. Maybe if we could find all the terrorists, but it’s a big ass world. There’d still be the problem of someone stopping all those ready to take their place.