61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by solvs, Apr 5, 2008.

  1. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #1
    HNN Poll: 61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst

    This while 81% of Americans think country on "wrong track"

    I know some will say polls don't mean anything and others will say I'm stating the obvious, but it's still pretty damning.
     
  2. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    Academic polls should be reliable if they are for proper scientific research, and otherwise they should still be reasonably good.
     
  3. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #3
    To be fair, it's a little early to judge him as the worst ever. There may yet be contact from life on another planet that will usher in a golden age of humanity, which he may be able to take some credit for.
     
  4. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #4
    Kind of early to put a historical slant on a president that is still sitting.
     
  5. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #5
    That was touched upon in the study. That's why the number is so low. A vast majority still say he's near the bottom and could very well be one of the worst, but are withholding judgment until after it's all over. Again, still pretty damning.

    Come on now though, anyone think he won't be at least near the bottom?
     
  6. Iscariot macrumors 68030

    Iscariot

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Location:
    Toronteazy
    #6
    All depends on the aliens. And also, if they're peaceful.
     
  7. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #7
    My guess is his "rate" or whatever, will be much higher about 20-30 years down the road when the effects of his presidency on the Middle East can be seen.

    Sixty years ago, no one would have dreamed that the US and Japan would become very close allies.

    Country building takes time. It took Japan many years, and it will take Iraq many years. And the lasting positive effects will be good IMHO.
     
  8. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #8
    Even if Iraq turns out all rosy in a few generations, do you really think he'll get all the credit? Especially if it's another Presidency that turns things around? And even then, what about everything else? He hasn't exactly done much else that's turned out so great. Even if he caught Bin Laden, at this point the question would be, why did it take so long.

    And if Iraq and the ME is still a mess, especially the 'stans, what then?
     
  9. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #9
    There is no denying that he, or his father, got us into Iraq in the first place so they will get some credit I would think.

    As for Bin Laden, during President Clinton's time, he had opportunities to get Bin Laden and chose not to. I don't see this being brought up much these days.

    Good historians do detailed research. Time will only tell how they view President Bush down the road. I hope that I am around 30 years from now to see! :)
     
  10. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #10
    While I'm not defending Clinton for all his mistakes, and there were many, this is also only part of the story. He actually did go after those we could after the '93 bombing. Despite calls for going after Iraq even back then, we :shock: used police work to arrest some of those responsible. Bin Laden was a looming threat, but Clinton did try to go after Al Queda. He didn't pursue them enough though, being accused of wagging the dog to take focus off of the controversies at the time, some of which were his fault. Leaving the task up to the future President. Handing over a ton of info on what they had been learning, with Richard Clarke telling the new administration how much of a threat they could be. We all know what happened, but here it is 6 1/2 years after 9/11, which we know Bin Laden helped plan and perpetrate, so what's Bush's excuse?

    Try as you might to blame Clinton, he wasn't the one who received something that said "Bin Laden Determined to Attack" right before he did, nor did he send our troops instead to another country that had nothing to do with it, taking resources from where the real threat was, where the real terrorists were. Actually, Clinton never stopped bombing Iraq and kept Saddam relatively in check. Though he did also think they had WMDs, we didn't get stuck in the middle of a quagmire there, all while the 'stans and the rest of the ME get worse, and losing the favor of the rest of the world. Funny how even Cheney knew enough not to engage Iraq directly the way we did, again, while we were still in Afghanistan, loosing focus there, as did Bush Sr. But now it's vital. Because 9/11 changed anything. When it happened 9 months into Bush's Presidency. Because his administrations ignored the warnings. Then pulled resources to go somewhere else that wasn't responsible. Where we still are. But it's somehow Clinton's fault for not going after Bin Laden before 9/11. K. :confused:

    Seriously though, looking at the current economic situation, the fact that Iraq isn't going to get all that much better in the next few months, we're still losing in the 'stans where we haven't captured the person who actually perpetrated 9/11, Katrina, and the scandals are so plentiful, do I even really need to go on? Face it, Bush is not going down as a good Pres, let alone a great one. He'll be lucky not to be at the bottom. Even if the ME suddenly does become a great place in a few decades. I'm sure there will be people trying to give him all the credit for the good while blaming the bad on everyone else, but historians are already saying he's one of the worst and that's saying something. Guessing they all can't be partisans. They see what he's done, what he's doing. Something many of us can tell by living it first hand. He has a lot to do to change that in the next few months, and based on how it's been so far, can you honestly say that's going to change any time soon?
     
  11. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #11
    Nevertheless, I don't see how any amount of reflection or changing world circumstances could raise him from his position at or near the nadir of American presidents.

    Again, "much" higher I cannot possibly see. A little higher, perhaps.

    As to Japan, I don't think that's a comparable position. Remember, Japan attacked us, and was one of three main players in trying to take over the world. Neither of those charges can be laid at the feet of Iraq.
     
  12. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #12
    Ah, I see what you have done here. See, you have confused that miserable ABC propaganda piece The Road to 9/11 with something that actually ever happened.
     
  13. Zwhaler macrumors 603

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #13
    Hmm, now how did I predict what this thread was about when all I could see in the "Last Post" column was "61% of Historians..." :rolleyes:

    Let me just say that I agree with those 61%.

    Oh my god I so remember that horrible piece. They implied that Clinton was to blame so many times I couldn't even count. Then later didn't they say that it was a story and not based on actual facts or something?
     
  14. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #14
    Most of the Bush administration is under investigation, and much has already resigned in disgrace. Bush II's crimes are extensive, starting with gutting the Constitution. He is evil and likely to be indicted for high crimes, unless he gets a pardon. The worst ever? My memory only goes back to JFK. I did not think anyone could challenge Nixon, but GW makes Nixon look good. It takes a diehard republican to still think positively of GW.
     
  15. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #15
    I would think that after 7 years of his evil high crimes that he would have already been charged and removed from office. I mean it did start when he stole the election. :rolleyes: Since that hasn't happened yet, I guess you can still keep hoping.
     
  16. Glen Quagmire macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #16
    If you forget Watergate, spying on his opponents and the like, Nixon actually did some good things:

    * Opened dialogue with China and Russia.
    * Pulled troops out of Vietnam (eventually).
    * Established the EPA and OSHA.

    He even called for the introduction of comprehensive health insurance and a federal health plan in his 1974 State of the Union speech. Thirty four years later, how many millions of Americans are without health insurance?

    As for Bush, he's only got ten months to go. Unless he cures AIDS, solves the Israel-Palestine issue, brings peace to Afghanistan, Iraq and Darfur, forces China to respect human rights and catches Bin Laden personally, he's utterly doomed. Worst ever? Depends on whether McCain wins in November and brings four (or eight) years more of Bushist policies.
     
  17. Prof. macrumors 601

    Prof.

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Chicago
    #17
    I've been saying it forever. This just confirms it.:D
     
  18. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #18
    I think even the conservatives here could agree that he has fallen far short of expectations - and for some, those were pretty low to begin with.

    After all, many Conservatives have big problems with his Presidency - from fiscal policy, to role-of-government, to generally poor execution of ideas which may have merit (depending on your POV).

    Most people want a President who gets things accomplished - and Bush - despite a friendly Congress for most of his Presidency, and with the most free-reign of a President in a while - just dropped the ball.

    The GOP was so impressive from a marketing standpoint over the last 10 years or so, it is a shame that Bush didn't get more done, and a testament that despite, he is very unpopular.
     
  19. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #19
    I think it is way to early to determine this. There needs some time afterwards before it could be decide on.

    Right now people just want to bash and not look at any good he has done. That and people have a horible long term memory so they do not remember some other god aulful presidents we have had. This include historians. Rating while he is in office is just well short term memory. Let a few more presidents go by and then get back to me.
     
  20. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #20
    What "good"? Name one thing. Just one. He began by taking endless holidays when he should have been at work, and he has made a complete balls-up of everything he's touched ever since. He has made the US more distrusted than ever in the world, he failed to deal with Katrina, he has torn up the Constitution, has pandered to religious groups, has started an illegal war, has been responsible for hundreds of thousands of needless deaths and has run the economy into the ground. He has played fast and loose with the environment, has damaged relationships with the US' allies and is continuing to threaten to wage further wars he cannot afford to support. Did I miss anything?
     
  21. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #21
    and this is my point exactly. I might like to point out that he was also president during very dark time.

    it is already crystal clear this country has forgotten any lessons really learned by 9/11. As far as I can tell everyone has pretty much gone back to there normal lives and really pay no attention to it. Complaining about the same things before hand.

    Oh well as I said before people has short term memories.

    But my point was it is by far to early to make that call. People still are full of anger and short term blindness to make any good call.
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    Come on. that simply isn't true. For most of the world it is a period of prosperity and the cold war is over. Climate change is also around the corner but hasn't hit fully yet. The worst thing that happened in the entire period is 9/11 where 3000 people died. Comparatively in 2006 there were 15854 murders in the United States (source).
     
  23. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #23
    So you are saying that 9/11 is not one of the worse events to happen to happen to the US in it history. Wow. Some one thinks that terrorisms is not a big deal.
     
  24. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    9/11 was appalling and its sad that so many innocent people died. However its only one event and at least in the united states the terrorists have failed to repeat the attack. Because 9/11 happened doesn't make the entire period of the Bush Presidency "dark".
     
  25. NAG macrumors 68030

    NAG

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Location:
    /usr/local/apps/nag
    #25
    If Bush is president during dark times it is because he helped make them. Saying whether or not he is the worst president is pretty arbitrary but the fact remains he was on the wrong end of the scale when it comes to quality of presidents.
     

Share This Page