• 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!

Who is treated worse, Obama or GW Bush?

Who is treated worse, Obama or GW Bush?


  • Total voters
    44
Bush by far, no contest. Bush is scapegoated for a whole bunch of crap he had nothing to do with. America's recession is the fault of corporations and the public, not the office or his Cabinet. He's called stupid, yet he has two degrees from two different Ivy-league schools. I think the main thing is that the lies and slander being told about Bush is something lots of people believe, whereas most of the crap slung about Obama is so far-fetched it's borderline funny, like he's a Muslim and terrorist because of his middle name.

Bush was definitely in the bottom half of presidents all-time, but he gets blamed for a HEAP of stuff he has no reason to be blamed for, unless you're a far-left socialist who thinks everything should be controlled by government. Meanwhile, Obama is clearly to blame for almost everything going bad in his administration. However, vocal media and irate ideologues will make decisions for most people.
 
Bush - even Fox ran him into the ground and he's still being blamed for pigs flying.
 
Really it is about the same, but I think the media and people behind Obama treat him badly for not doing enough or being as forceful as Bush was, Bush because he was to forceful.
 
Bush, without question.

Even today, when the Mesiah pulls out his trademarked "It's Bush's Fault" speech, the media lap it up.

MORE Americans are dying in Afghanland than ever before. Where's Code Pinko today? Cindy Sheehan? Where's the media coverage of those clowns?
 
Well besides that, people treat Obama like he is some kind of elitist socialist when really, the guy has far more in common with normal folk than Bush ever did. Bush wasn't even born into normalcy, he's always been that "1%". Bush I think was 100% perception, the whole "I could drink a beer with this guy" thing was really over the top with him.
 
Even though I cannot stand Bush? I gotta keep it real and say that Bush is treated far worse:)
 
Really it is about the same, but I think the media and people behind Obama treat him badly for not doing enough or being as forceful as Bush was, Bush because he was to forceful.

Sorry but the main stream media has been very kind to Obama.
 
Sorry but the main stream media has been very kind to Obama.

So far, they have. The non mainstream media has more than made up for them, ranting about his being a Muslim, not born in the US, consorting with terrorists, being a Marxist, the AntiChrist, and so on. Of course, no sane person believes any of that anyway, so, yes, the media has been kind to Obama.

So far. The sharks are still circling.
 
I suppose you guys are right, however Bush kind of deserved it and set himself up quite a few times, he got about the appropriate treatment that someone should get when they treat a nation like a bull they aren't trying to get bucked off of...
 
One thing I do not understand is the huge deal they/media have been making over Obama going on The View. Big frigging deal. Not:)
 
I dunno did the media make a big deal over Bush going on Dr. Phil?
 
The only fair comparison is Bush's first year and a half to Obama's. I think in that case, Obama has been treated worse, but it's one of those really subjective things that it is impossible to be unbiased on.

One has to recall the election process Bush went under.
 
Its hard to really compare.

You go over all and I'd say as you get into Bush's second term the hatred, vitrial, and anger towards him was greater and more wide spread than Obama's is currently. However its really not too fair to take something built up over 5 or 6 years compared to something built up over a year or two.

You go equal portions in time and again, its not a fair comparison. I'd say Bush got relatively equal treatment initially. Worse treatment from the media, but also I think a smaller fervant hatred coming from the opposing base. While truther's weren't there yet, you had the always fun "Bush Stole the Presidency" people already cropping up at that point. However you also had 9/11 happened which is an anomoly unlike almost any other, which shifted things greatly for a short time. As such you could compare somewhat Bush to Obama now and say they're relatively on par with perhaps a bit more for Bush, but it'll be difficult to compare "The first two years".

I'd say while its relatively equal, I would possibly give the nod to Bush. The reason for this is that it was the "Cool" thing to do to hate on, make fun of, or insult Bush so you had people who were rather political ambivilent jumping onto the bandwagon to treat him harshly. The media generally was less favorable of him as a whole which has an affect on many of the non-political active as well. I would perhaps say that the extreme ends of the spectrum, there may be a tad more in Obama's at this point in their Presidencies, but as an overall thing I'd give the nod to Bush.
 
Bush was treated worse and did not deserve it. Barack Hussein Obama is getting a free pass from the media but the majority of Americans do not like him or his policies.
 
Back
Top Bottom