• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was George W Bush a good president?[W:439:621]

Was George W Bush a good president?


  • Total voters
    124
  • Poll closed .
75% think, that George W. Bush wasn't a good president, I can't understand this.
 
75% think, that George W. Bush wasn't a good president, I can't understand this.

Me either.

Given the mess caused by the invasion of Iraq, I'd expect it to be higher than that.
 
I do not understand this bad result. I think another President were not better in that situation.
 
Re: Was George W Bush a good president?

I think we can trust the historians when they agree that GW Bush was not just bad but the WORST President in our lifetimes.

“No individual president can compare to the second Bush,” wrote one. “Glib, contemptuous, ignorant, incurious, a dupe of anyone who humors his deluded belief in his heroic self, he has bankrupted the country with his disastrous war and his tax breaks for the rich, trampled on the Bill of Rights, appointed foxes in every henhouse, compounded the terrorist threat, turned a blind eye to torture and corruption and a looming ecological disaster, and squandered the rest of the world’s goodwill. In short, no other president’s faults have had so deleterious an effect on not only the country but the world at large.

“With his unprovoked and disastrous war of aggression in Iraq and his monstrous deficits, Bush has set this country on a course that will take decades to correct,” said another historian. “When future historians look back to identify the moment at which the United States began to lose its position of world leadership, they will point—rightly—to the Bush presidency. Thanks to his policies, it is now easy to see America losing out to its competitors in any number of area: China is rapidly becoming the manufacturing powerhouse of the next century, India the high tech and services leader, and Europe the region with the best quality of life.
- See more at: History News Network | HNN Poll: 61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst
 
I do not understand this bad result. I think another President were not better in that situation.

It wasn't just the 5000+ servicemembers who died because of his military adventurism. It wasn't just the $12B+ in taxpayer dollars we were spending over there every month. It was also the 100K+ innocent Iraqi men, women, and children who died because of the invasion.

Bush wanted to invade Iraq long before 9/11 - In his very first cabinet meeting after he was sworn in the first time (in January 2001) the topic was the invasion of Iraq:

Suskind cited a Pentagon document titled "Foreign Suitors For Iraqi Oilfield Contracts," which, he said, outlines areas of oil exploration. "It talks about contractors around the world from ... 30, 40 countries and which ones have what intentions on oil in Iraq."

In the book, {former Bush Administration Treasury Secretary} O'Neill is quoted as saying he was surprised that no one in a National Security Council meeting asked why Iraq should be invaded.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying 'Go find me a way to do this,'" O'Neill said.


And what did Bush do when CIA Director George Tenet told him that the intel showed that there were no nukes?

The next day, Sept. 18, Tenet briefed Bush on Sabri. “Tenet told me he briefed the president personally,” said one of the former CIA officers. According to Tenet, Bush’s response was to call the information “the same old thing.” Bush insisted it was simply what Saddam wanted him to think. “The president had no interest in the intelligence,” said the CIA officer. The other officer said, “Bush didn’t give a **** about the intelligence. He had his mind made up.”

What about all those peace-lovin' Democratic senators who voted for the invasion? Aren't they just as guilty? The same reference shows that Bush knew that there was intel from a well-placed source named "Sabri" that there were no nukes, but he did not allow anyone in Congress to know about that intelligence:

In the congressional debate over the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, even those voting against it gave credence to the notion that Saddam possessed WMD. Even a leading opponent such as Sen. Bob Graham, then the Democratic chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who had instigated the production of the NIE, declared in his floor speech on Oct. 12, 2002, “Saddam Hussein’s regime has chemical and biological weapons and is trying to get nuclear capacity.” Not a single senator contested otherwise. None of them had an inkling of the Sabri intelligence. (underlining mine)

THAT, sir, is why Bush was a terrible president. He had decided to invade Iraq long before 9/11...and yes, it WAS about oil, and about pride.
 
It's too early for a definitive judgement, but on the whole I don't think George W. Bush was a bad President. But not quite among the top rank either.
 
I can't fathom how this is even up for debate or how the poll got so many "Yes" votes. He wantonly sacrificed human lives in pursuit of his own goals, LIED about WMDs, had the IQ of a turnip, collapsed the economy, and all with a smile on his stupid cowboy face. He's the worst president I can think of. In regard to recent generations, Nixon comes damned close.
 
I can't fathom how this is even up for debate or how the poll got so many "Yes" votes. He wantonly sacrificed human lives in pursuit of his own goals, LIED about WMDs, had the IQ of a turnip, collapsed the economy, and all with a smile on his stupid cowboy face. He's the worst president I can think of. In regard to recent generations, Nixon comes damned close.

Clearly you have no grasp of US history.
 
If he is the worst US President you can think of then that says a lot about your ignorance of US history.

In my lifetime he is, and as I stated Nixon comes a second close in recent history. That's an opinion. If I go further back in presidential history, his number won't be much more favorable on the list, so why bother? He's swimming in the double digit end of the pool as it is. You want I should throw a Millard Fillmore or an Andrew Johnson in there to make your prize pig look less filthy?
 
I used to think he was ok in a half-assed way.

Now I think he was one of the worst in the last 4-5 or so, if not more.

Did I say this before?

Meh.
 
Re: Was George W Bush a good president?

The "Herbert Hoover of the 21st Century"? Surely you jest. The man drove this country to the brink of economic and moral bankruptcy...the likes this country had only seen during the great depression.
 
Re: Was George W Bush a good president?

LOL drama much? Bush will be rated higher than Obama and Carter for sure. I know that really upsets people like you. But tell me-what causes so severe a case of BDS?

LOL...you have to be kidding. History often judges people higher than they deserve, however, GWB has waaaaay too much baggage. A failed war, a failed economy, torture...etc. He will forever be known as the Herbert Hoover of the 21st century. Sorry to burst your bubble.
 
73.02 percent of those who voted said no.

G.W. Bush may not be the worst president ever but he's mighty close to the bottom.
 
George W. Bush did not only help the rich people, I think the most of us forget that.
 
Re: Was George W Bush a good president?

LOL...you have to be kidding. History often judges people higher than they deserve, however, GWB has waaaaay too much baggage. A failed war, a failed economy, torture...etc. He will forever be known as the Herbert Hoover of the 21st century. Sorry to burst your bubble.


Given your posts demonstrate that you are one of the Democrat Party's biggest fan boys and one of Hillary's biggest supporters, I really don't find your perspective to have any objectivity or merit.
 
73.02 percent of those who voted said no.

G.W. Bush may not be the worst president ever but he's mighty close to the bottom.

Obama and Carter are clearly for worse-as to those who have served during my lifetime. LBJ was more effective but his lasting legacy is billions upon billions wasted in making blacks more dependent on government and destroying two parent households in lower-economic class areas
 
Re: Was George W Bush a good president?

Given your posts demonstrate that you are one of the Democrat Party's biggest fan boys and one of Hillary's biggest supporters, I really don't find your perspective to have any objectivity or merit.

You haven't followed me well then. I am hardly Hillary's biggest supporter. She is actually much to moderate/centrist and too much of a warhawk for my tastes. That being said, I would take her primarily because she's about the best that I can realistically hope to get elected. I also think that the vast majority of the Democrats are spineless and so afraid of their own shadow that they are pretty worthless. I support the platform of the Democratic party however.

But back on subject. The record of GWB is horrendous. There are people who hope against hope that somehow his record will be vindicated. First of all, there is no vindicating his economic record. He drove this country to the brink of bankruptcy. The numbers speak for themselves. As for the rest of his Presidency, I can't imagine how history is ever going to judge the Iraq war as anything other than a major blunder. The bottom line is that GWB was in over his head. He probably isn't a evil man, but surrounding himself with people that ran his Presidency that he will be blamed with in the annuls of history.
 
Re: Was George W Bush a good president?

You haven't followed me well then. I am hardly Hillary's biggest supporter. She is actually much to moderate/centrist and too much of a warhawk for my tastes. That being said, I would take her primarily because she's about the best that I can realistically hope to get elected. I also think that the vast majority of the Democrats are spineless and so afraid of their own shadow that they are pretty worthless. I support the platform of the Democratic party however.

But back on subject. The record of GWB is horrendous. There are people who hope against hope that somehow his record will be vindicated. First of all, there is no vindicating his economic record. He drove this country to the brink of bankruptcy. The numbers speak for themselves. As for the rest of his Presidency, I can't imagine how history is ever going to judge the Iraq war as anything other than a major blunder. The bottom line is that GWB was in over his head. He probably isn't a evil man, but surrounding himself with people that ran his Presidency that he will be blamed with in the annuls of history.

when someone finds hillary too moderate and whines about Bush that is a rather strong endorsement that Bush was pretty good

Obama is far more over his head than Bush. Obama wasn't prepared to be president. Most who voted for him-especially in the primary, wanted a novelty or the ability to pretend they weren't racist if they voted for an unqualified black over a slightly more qualified white woman
 
Back
Top Bottom