Welcome to PatsFans.com

From across the pond... america's worst presidents...

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Nov 12, 2006.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,283
    Likes Received:
    127
    Ratings:
    +238 / 8 / -26

    The Independent asked its "experts" to write a short piece about America's worst presidents.. interesting Carter, Hoover and Coolidge get one vote each.. GWB gets three.. yes folks he is a winner.

    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article1963227.ece

    George W Bush: chosen by Owen Dudley Edwards

    The question "who is the worst US president" is something I have thought long and hard about and the answer is very simple: it is the incumbent president. I had previously thought that Nixon was the worst and there were other candidates such as Warren Harding - but they all pale in comparison to Bush. He has displaced all his predecessors. Nobody has been quite as appalling.

    George W Bush - chosen by A C Grayling

    Bush certainly is the worst president since the start of the 20th century. Before then, there was very little that US presidents could do. They did not have the same influence in world affairs that they have today. So since the start of the 20th century is the only basis for comparison. The first reason for Bush being the worst US president is his insensitivity and his ignorance. Before he became president he was asked questions such as what is the capital of Sweden - and he showed that he was very, very poorly prepared.
  2. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,716
    Likes Received:
    73
    Ratings:
    +152 / 7 / -13

    Of course 20 years ago these folks would have said Ronald Reagan.

    I am always amused by the Euro's critiquing American when there civilization is going down the tubes and being replaced by an Islamic society (check European demographics). It now looks as if WW1 & 2 will destroy Europe ALL fo Europe, it will just take ~ 100 yrs after the end of WW2. The US just propped them up for a few years after WW2.
  3. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,652
    Likes Received:
    154
    Ratings:
    +480 / 1 / -9

    Who gives a f-ck what those a$s holes think, the next time they need help with something let them run to France or Germany.
    :eek: where's the bricks?
  4. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    If they think he's the worst as of now...imagine what they'll think when the veil is torn away from the actual inner workings over the past six years when there were no check son his power.

    Examples: Cheneys secret energy task force; the truth to the intel manipulation prior to Iraq; the secret prisons; the stolen CPA funds (tens of billions worth)

    Shining a long overdue light on these areas will turn stomachs even more.
  5. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,911
    Likes Received:
    165
    Ratings:
    +362 / 4 / -2

    GWB is not the worst president ever. Obviously he is the current president in very unpopular times. Anyone that would call GWB worse than Carter needs to checked for a pulse. Bush is very unpopular by a good portion of the country. It's silly to cite a serving president as the worst when it is impossible to know what his policies will mean down the road. This is a classic example of the "what have you done for me lately" mentallity. So are we to assume that in October 2001 GWB was teh greatest president ever? How about in MAy of 2003? Was he fantastic then? Hard to call a serving president the worst when a presidents policies are long term. For example, what effect will Alito and Roberts have on the US in 10-20 years time? What if Iraq does become a sovereign democratic nation in 10-20 years time? What if the Military Commission Act does prove to be a servicable tool that defines the rights of terrorist suspects versus uniformed soldiers? Obviously there is lots to dislike about GWB. The border, Amnesty, spending, etc...but to call a serving president the worst is a bit illogical. My guess is in '94 they would have called Clinton the worst. Or in '92 they'd have called Bush Sr. the worst. A president has to be judged some years after his terms have finished.
  6. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    This post seems relevant.

    RW...seems with Bushs polling numbers now down there with Carters, you may want to consider taking america's pulse??
  7. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,911
    Likes Received:
    165
    Ratings:
    +362 / 4 / -2

    I stand by what I said in November. We've had 30 years to analyze Carter's presidency, and he still qualifies as the worst. GW is still in office. Am I saying that GW won't be considered the worst in 20, or 30 years? Absolutely not. He very well could be. My point then, and my point now, is that it is somewhat senseless to certify a sitting policy with long term ramifications versus policies we've had 30 years to disect. It's like using polls numbers to dictate policy.
  8. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Fair enough. But as far as public opinion goes, they are in the same league. If you (or the GOP at large) choose to ignore the import of that fact, do so at your own peril and expect what Buckley said: that Bush is ruining the conservative movement and the party will probably not get popularity back for a generation to come.

    Its too bad one bum had to come along and ruin the party, huh?
  9. gomezcat

    gomezcat It's SIR Moderator to you Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,551
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    As much as I am very unimpressed with Bush at the moment, I think RW's point is a good one. Let's see what Iraq looks like in ten or twenty years' time. My suspicion is that things won't look better, but I have been wrong plenty of times before.
    I would also point out that the President should be seen in the context of his entourage. If it is a success/disaster, then the influence of the Neo Cons needs to be taken into account.
    It should also be pointed out that The Independent is a liberal newspaper.
  10. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,911
    Likes Received:
    165
    Ratings:
    +362 / 4 / -2

    FYI, Gw's approval rating, and the Congress' are neck and neck, and statistically equal (32% versus 37%, with a 3-5% margin of error). Remember, that GW had (even if artificial) the highest approval rating ever. Polls are polls, telling, but obvioulsy emotional, and short term. GW is by no means some great president. Don't get me wrong in that regard. He's no conservative (fiscal certainly) as is evidenced by the report out today about government never being bigger in our history. He could go down as the worst by a landslide, but my simple point is that it is unfair to compare someone who's had 20-30 years of relfection versus someone who's still at the throne. If, as these people have said so in their words, the position of president of the US is powerfull and influential, with long term ramifications, then we need to assess it in comparrison to his predecessors only after he's had a similar distance from his term. Take Reagan for example. Everyone loved, and still love Reagan. I think Reagan was a very good president, but I think hindsight takes more away from him now, than anyone would have in 1988. Reagan did some shady, shady stuff, that people had no concern for back in yesteryear, but that we look upon differently, at least I do, today. I just don't think you can take a "what have you done for me lately" approach when comparing past presidents legacy, to a sitting presidents. We can assume anything, but to certify is illogical to me.
  11. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,911
    Likes Received:
    165
    Ratings:
    +362 / 4 / -2

    That reminds me, people were talking about the demise, even the disintigration of the Democratic party not too long ago. Look at them now. When you have a too party system like we do, it's virtually impossible to destroy a party for a generation, not unless you do everything right. Sadly, I don't think anyone in our government does anything right, which is why pointing a finger on the other guys direction has been the best campaign platfrom possible. Who suffers? Joe Taxpayer.
  12. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    These sorts of polls are ridiculous because they are always going to be disproportionately focused on the current. In the late 70's, some Chicago radio station did a poll to find the greatest song ever. The winner was "Kung-Fu Fighting". Needless to say, 30 years later, we would not see the same result.

    When Truman left office, he could easily have won a "worst president" contest. Today he's on the cover of Newsweek as the guy everyone wants to emulate. 60 years from now, Carter, Hoover and Coolidge will still be getting "worst ever" votes, but don't be surprised if Bush is on the cover of Newsweek as an example of the rare U.S. President that stood up to terror.
    Last edited: May 11, 2007
  13. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,911
    Likes Received:
    165
    Ratings:
    +362 / 4 / -2


    :eek: Oh my!


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BNWmnHPFvE
  14. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Or conversely, the rare american president that broke the army and marine corps for an occupation of a country that never attacked us, and bankrupted the US in doing so. Now, wouldn't that suck?
  15. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,716
    Likes Received:
    73
    Ratings:
    +152 / 7 / -13



    Why trash Clinton over Haiti and Kosovo?
  16. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,098
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Really?? When Bush came to office, he was given the finest military in modern history, and a huge budget surplus... your partisan revisionist history notwithstanding.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>