Trump: Bush is the Worst President in History

[ullr420]

I really must agree 100% with "The donald" on his views.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a30rJQbDDno


Thanks Goerge W Bush :wave:

[Kazimierz]

Trump is obviously a liberal, hippie, un-patriotic terrorist-sympathizer. How can you call Fearless Leader anything but the greatest President on Earth.

In all honesty though, it's hard to call him the worst President. But he's certainly very low on the list, and he's certainly been responsible for many gigantic fuckups during his presidency. But he's also succeeded in polarizing this country so much, that many of the people on the Right who support him can't admit that their President is a poor one, and instead go on proclaiming how he's one of the greatest. Fail.

[Zooch]

Trump is obviously a liberal, hippie, un-patriotic terrorist-sympathizer. How can you call Fearless Leader anything but the greatest President on Earth.

In all honesty though, it's hard to call him the worst President. But he's certainly very low on the list, and he's certainly been responsible for many gigantic fuckups during his presidency. But he's also succeeded in polarizing this country so much, that many of the people on the Right who support him can't admit that their President is a poor one, and instead go on proclaiming how he's one of the greatest. Fail.

A few gigantic fuckups? His whole presidency has been a fuck up. Sure, go to Afghanistan. Good, thats where Bin Laden is. Don't send troops to where he is until two months after the invasion? Lame. Go to Iraq for oil? Maybe one of the biggest fuck ups of American history. Vietnam was about Communism, but Iraq is NOT about terrorism.

[pat99872]

Haha, donald trump is the man!

[The Machine]

Completely true. But seriously, you have to blame the American people. If there weren't so many narrow-minded people (*cough* conservatives), we definately wouldn't have made such a bad decision on a president.

[Knoodle]

Worst president?

What about Jimmah Cartah the peanut farmer from Georgia? Mr. Trump must have been in his heavy drug usage period Jimmah was in office.

[Kazimierz]

A few gigantic fuckups? His whole presidency has been a fuck up. Sure, go to Afghanistan. Good, thats where Bin Laden is. Don't send troops to where he is until two months after the invasion? Lame. Go to Iraq for oil? Maybe one of the biggest fuck ups of American history. Vietnam was about Communism, but Iraq is NOT about terrorism.

I wrote "many", not "few", boss.

[YouEnjoyMyself]

Although I agree with his assertion, I think he's an asshat who doesn't need to open his big mouth any more.

But it's his right to talk as much as he pleases...it's just sad he gets so much face time.

[Shorty|*|RocK89]

One thing I like about him is he doesn't give a shit about what people think he is going to straight up tell you how he feels and I completely agree with his point a view the sad thing is stupid hicks voting for bush in the south didn't make anything better.

[Mr. Heskey]

Although I agree he is a pretty crappy president, I won't go so far as to call him the worst. Carter, Harding and Grant is who I'd put right below him.

I just love what this guy has done to the reputation of conservatives:rollseyes


BTW very surprising that Trump is calling him the worst of all people.:squint:

[bergshadow]

Carter didn't combine flagrant crime with his ineffectuality, and he didn't balloon the debt, and he didn't start any wars.

It's pretty difficult to trump starting a loser's war on top of domestic incompetence and economic mismanagement, and when the criminal element is added - where's the competition?

But he was re-elected, sort of - vote rigging and election fraud is a kind of competence - so it's hard to say he didn't represent his constituency to their satisfaction. They wanted to be lied to, he obliged.

It's just that with Harding, Grant, even with Reagan, it only took a couple of years of reasonable governance to dig out of the hole - this mess is going to take decades to clean up.

[pat99872]

One thing I like about him is he doesn't give a shit about what people think he is going to straight up tell you how he feels and I completely agree with his point a view the sad thing is stupid hicks voting for bush in the south didn't make anything better.

I remember a TV station interviewed a bunch of trailor trash inbred rednecks in texas and asked why they voted Bush. One person says "Cause he's from texas, and everyone whos from texas is right"

[Mr. Heskey]

Carter didn't combine flagrant crime with his ineffectuality, and he didn't balloon the debt, and he didn't start any wars.

It's pretty difficult to trump starting a loser's war on top of domestic incompetence and economic mismanagement, and when the criminal element is added - where's the competition?

But he was re-elected, sort of - vote rigging and election fraud is a kind of competence - so it's hard to say he didn't represent his constituency to their satisfaction. They wanted to be lied to, he obliged.

It's just that with Harding, Grant, even with Reagan, it only took a couple of years of reasonable governance to dig out of the hole - this mess is going to take decades to clean up.


You can't be serious can you? I said he was a bad president, I don't think he's a criminal.

I guess the whole notion that liberals think that reagan was satan and conservatives think he was jesus still holds true today.

[bergshadow]

You can't be serious can you? I said he was a bad president, I don't think he's a criminal. Well, let's see: He got caught insider trading, got let off going AWOL from his Guard unit, got busted for something drug related that had him doing community service, before he was elected Pres.

He also made a ton of money from the advantages of his office as Governor, increasing the value of his private investments with public monies and political influence. His local DA declined to investigate, but his operation was successfully sued in civil court.

His long time friend, single most important financial backer, and important political supporter in his first Pres campaign was a co-architect of the single biggest known financial fraud in the history of the world.

His VP holds millions of dollars in stock options from a major and favored government contractor, even while in office - a company he also has personal family ties to at a minimum. His home state and federal political muscle has been indicted, the most important lobbyist during his first administration has been convicted and jailed, all of his brothers have been brought to court for financial crimes, the leadership of the Party that nominated him has been censured and subpeonaed and still faces possible charges.

If he's not a criminal, he's possibly the only non-criminal among his friends and supporters.

But that's not what I meant. I meant his administration and circle of cronies is and has been rife with criminal enterprise. If, as you seem to believe, they've left him out of all the loops (a la Reagan, due to senility?), that still speaks poorly of his performance in office.

[Spike Lee]

I guess the whole notion that liberals think that reagan was satan and conservatives think he was jesus still holds true today.

Both notions of Reagan are right. He hurt us more in the long run with the foreign policy and abuse of the Monroe Doctrine.

[alex_de_large]

Say what you will about Carter, but IMO he was a president who was guided by basic humanitarian principles. Of all the presidents that claim they are Christian, Carter was the only one who really represented in his actions what Christianity is all about.

[Mr. Heskey]

Both notions of Reagan are right. He hurt us more in the long run with the foreign policy and abuse of the Monroe Doctrine.

He did build up the military though. I think much of the economic sucess that bush 1 and clinton saw had its roots, or at least some of its fundamental aspects from his economic policy.

Say what you will about Carter, but IMO he was a president who was guided by basic humanitarian principles. Of all the presidents that claim they are Christian, Carter was the only one who really represented in his actions what Christianity is all about.

Carter did have morality at least, which is something you very seldom see with politicians this day and age.

He was just too simple of a man to lead the nation. The economy during his reign was reduced to rubble.

[Bergs]

Completely true. But seriously, you have to blame the American people. If there weren't so many narrow-minded people (*cough* conservatives), we definately wouldn't have made such a bad decision on a president.

I give you the picture perfect illustration of the problem. Disgust and hatred towards those who believe in a different American political ideology. This leads to a complete and utter inability to compromise which leads to the radical right gaining control of the Republican party and the radical left gaining control of the Democrats. Where are the moderates? Alot of conservatives used to declared themselves the silent majority, theyre not. The true silent majority is the moderates on both sides of the aisle that are being shut out by the party lines that consistantly move towards the extremes and alienate any person that seeks to express some level of independent thought.

I don't think you can label Bush the worst President in history yet, because history has not yet taken place, you need some time to look back and analyze policy outcomes from afar. I think in 2015 when we look back at this administration it will certainly be a contender for worst, atleast in the modern political age, say post WWI. I am almost certain that he will be a surefire lock for worst President in my lifetime up to this point. (Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II)

[david_slupper]

He may not be the worst, but he certainly is on the top 5 worst.

[El Bandito]

If there weren't so many narrow-minded people (*cough* conservatives), we definately wouldn't have made such a bad decision on a president.

the sad thing is stupid hicks voting for bush in the south didn't make anything better.

People like you two give northerners a bad name. You are the narrow minded ones in this case as you think someone that isn't a liberal or agrees with you must be stupid or narrow minded. The irony is fucking hilarious!!!!!

[Mr. Heskey]

People like you two give northerners a bad name. You are the narrow minded ones in this case as you think someone that isn't a liberal or agrees with you must be stupid or narrow minded. The irony is fucking hilarious!!!!!

I agree with you, although The machine is from south carolina I believe...

[bergshadow]

He did build up the military though. He damaged the military, by throwing all the money at worthless high-tech gadgets for the benefit of military contractors, and starting the currently peaking wave of privatisation. I think much of the economic sucess that bush 1 and clinton saw had its roots, or at least some of its fundamental aspects from his economic policy. He reversed some of his worst economic ventures in the last couple of years - although no one knows if he was lucid enough to have been actually involved in such decisions - and thereby helped set up the recovery from his disastrous deregulations and huge borrowings. Bush sort of treaded water, but Clinton bailed that sprung craft out - took him three years.

Clinton actually got some cooperation from the Republicans on economic issues, partly because his own approach was rightist and corporate oriented, and partly because Reagan's results had scared them into sobriety.
This leads to a complete and utter inability to compromise which leads to the radical right gaining control of the Republican party and the radical left gaining control of the Democrats. Where are the moderates? There is no left in American national politics, let alone a radical left. The people in control of the Dems, the beltway crowd, are center-right authoritarians.

[slapnpopbass]

Well, I disagree with that statement. President Bush isnt the worst, but he is most certainly NOT the best. Trump is entitled to his opinion just as much as you and I.

Has anyone else noticed his attention-whoring? I was channel surfing and found him on the male soap opera "WWE". I had to laugh my ass off at this pathetic attempt to reach to such an audience.

[whocares]

^^ Oh, but then again, when he was attention whoring because of a regulation that forbid him to fly and giant american flag, conservatives where totally supporting him saying things like "hurray for Trump" and shit...

[Bergs]

There is no left in American national politics, let alone a radical left. The people in control of the Dems, the beltway crowd, are center-right authoritarians.

:rolleyes: Political relativism, according to politics relative to the United States there is a left. Yes, in the global political spectrum American politics technically fall right of center. There very much is a left wing in American politics relative to a right wing, and there is a radical left relative to a radical right. Stop with the pointless semantics.

[bergshadow]

There very much is a left wing in American politics relative to a right wing, and there is a radical left relative to a radical right. Grow up and stop with the pointless semantics. Pointless?

You are complaining about the lack of moderates. Where would you find them? There is no room in between the far right and the center right for a moderate.

It's like someone going to a dwarf convention and looking for people of moderate height. Some are shorter than others, but there are no extremely tall people there - only extremely short and not so short. "Moderate" makes no sense as a position between two extremes one of which does not exist.

About the criminality angle: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/03/16/nsl_signing_statement/index.html
- - All sorts of Bush apologists are trying to claim that the NSL law-breaking is simply a matter of accidental record-keeping failures or some sort of petty bureaucratic negligence. It is not. It is systematic and deliberate lawbreaking -- lawbreaking which the President openly assigned himself the right to authorize and which the DOJ, as Gonzales' letter reflects, plainly endorses. The very laws which the FBI was revealed to be breaking are the same laws the President proclaimed the power to break and which the DOJ refused to agree to obey.
- - -
If the President proclaims the right to break a law, and the DOJ refuses to say it will obey that law when asked directly, and it is then revealed that that very law has been broken -- repeatedly and in quite dangerous ways -- aren't those facts rather vital to understanding what happened here?

[TFS]

Well, I disagree with that statement. President Bush isnt the worst, but he is most certainly NOT the best. Trump is entitled to his opinion just as much as you and I.

Has anyone else noticed his attention-whoring? I was channel surfing and found him on the male soap opera "WWE". I had to laugh my ass off at this pathetic attempt to reach to such an audience.

Actually, Trump and Vince McMahon (owner and Chairman of WWE [formerly WWF but has since bought out WCW and ECW and had to change its name due to an intenrational lawsuit from World Wildlife Fund for usage of initials outside the US]) are good friends dating back to at least the mid 90's when a WrestleMania event was hosted in one of Trump's buildings in Vegas.

They are both cross-promoting their programming that airs on NBC affiliated networks (USA and Sci-Fi networks for WWE's Raw and ECW, NBC for Trump's The Apprentice). Trump gets mass exposure on WWE programming and an opportunity to demonstrate some character to attract fans to check out his show on NBC, while WWE (while simultaeniously broadcasting advertisements featuring celebrities and men and women in several white collar wealthy occupations professing their fandom of WWE) gets an opportunity to break the rather pathetic stereotype of what wrestling fans are as well as media exposure from news sources that are not typical sources for wrestling news.

This is all possible because of WWE's recent move back to NBC affiliate networks from Spike TV while Trump had started his reality series, and so far it's been a rather good success for both parties.

It's called marketing, not attention whoring, and it's the building blocks of successful pop culture programming, which includes both wrestling and reality television.



OT: his opinion, big fucking deal. At least he didn't go overseas and say he was ashamed the President was from such-and-such state.

[avix123]

Despite all the fuck-ups Bushie has made, I must say everyone I know has great jobs right now. Everyone that graduates with some sort of degree is finding employment, atleast around here. For all the things I hate about Bushie, this seems to be going right. Then again I guess when the government writes blank checks left and right, industries will surge.

[Nocturnal]

He did build up the military though. I think much of the economic sucess that bush 1 and clinton saw had its roots, or at least some of its fundamental aspects from his economic policy.




Reagan's economic policy was god awful, his only success were in the foreign policy area. (which can still be debated)

Trickle down or "supply side" economics has been proven to be a false concept. Lowering taxes to super low rates does spur the economy, but not enough to make up for the loss in tax revenue.

Then again I guess when the government writes blank checks left and right, industries will surge.

That is entirely correct. In the short term increasing government spending by such huge amounts AND cutting taxes will give things a boost. What the Reaganites don't seem to grasp is that you do have to pay it back eventually. (just like using credit cards to buy nice furniture)

:rolleyes: Political relativism, according to politics relative to the United States there is a left. Yes, in the global political spectrum American politics technically fall right of center. There very much is a left wing in American politics relative to a right wing, and there is a radical left relative to a radical right. Stop with the pointless semantics.

That might be fair if we only compared us to other nations, but even comparing us to ourselves just a few decades ago the difference is glaring. Also I find that the right wing ideologues seem to be just a little more out there than there opposites on the left.

[avix123]

Reagan's economic policy was god awful, his only success were in the foreign policy area. (which can still be debated)

Trickle down or "supply side" economics has been proven to be a false concept. Lowering taxes to super low rates does spur the economy, but not enough to make up for the loss in tax revenue.



That is entirely correct. In the short term increasing government spending by such huge amounts AND cutting taxes will give things a boost. What the Reaganites don't seem to grasp is that you do have to pay it back eventually. (just like using credit cards to buy nice furniture)

So is it safe to say that in the near future that we will see major "cutting of the fat" by lots of companies? If so I need to start kissing more ass pronto! Not that i'm a slack ass, it's just we need people because demand is so high, due in part to a strong artificial economy.(assuming we're on target with our theory of this economy falling soon)

[Sketcher]

While I agree that Bush isn't a good president, I wouldn't call him the worst. Carter may have to take that title.

[Nocturnal]

While I agree that Bush isn't a good president, I wouldn't call him the worst. Carter may have to take that title.


I've heard that a few times in this thread, but I have yet to see any solid backup for it.

It's easy to make a very solid case for GW being the worst, legally, morally, and especially in terms of pure results.

[Chewy]

I've heard that a few times in this thread, but I have yet to see any solid backup for it.

It's easy to make a very solid case for GW being the worst, legally, morally, and especially in terms of pure results.

I have to agree and disagree with you Cater was a benign President mediocrity and simply noneffective leadership were his largest crimes as a President, GW Bush on the other hand has failed horribly as a President but not enough for me to rank him the 'worst'. He is close but quite I'd rank Buchanan the worst and Harding a close second followed by Nixon then Bush.
All 4 of these men failed in their terms to keep the people of the US united, Buchanan being the worst case of this as his failures contributed to the US Civil War. Also all four of these Presidents increased the isolation of the US from the rest of the world, Harding being the greatest example. Harding along with Nixon and Bush were plagued with scandals.
Nixon, Bush and Buchanan were all Presidents during (or unable at adverting) unpopular wars.


Bush IMHO is in the top five but not the top and as for Carter... he was not a great president but far from the worst and is easily surpassed by the failures of the current administration.

[slapnpopbass]

^^ Oh, but then again, when he was attention whoring because of a regulation that forbid him to fly and giant american flag, conservatives where totally supporting him saying things like "hurray for Trump" and shit...

Well, yeah, that is in his First Amendment rights. He has a right to fly a huge American flag, and he has a right to say that Bush is the worst president in history. While I don't really agree with that (Bush is "meh" in my opinion), he has every right to say it, just like I do to say "Hillary is a fucking bitch".

And I'm more moderate than conservative... I hold a few liberal views.

Stop classifying me :motz_6:

[sl33per]

But he's also succeeded in polarizing this country so much, that many of the people on the Right who support him can't admit that their President is a poor one, and instead go on proclaiming how he's one of the greatest. Fail.

Conversely, he's polarized the country so much that many of the people on the Left despise him to the point that he's incapable of doing anything to please them.

Most of the members here aren't old enough to remember much past the first Bush, so it's easy for them to agree that W's the worst, because they're only comparing him to the others that they're familiar with.

[TiV2223]

Trumps right.

</discussion>

[bergshadow]

Buchanan the worst and Harding a close second followed by Nixon then Bush. None of them actually went out and started anything like this Iraq war, though. Buchanan was in a bad situation not of his own making, Harding's scandals were comparatively small time and he didn't screw up foreign policy, Nixon was criminal but not as financially corrupt on such a wide scale, he did have some foreign policy successes, and there were areas of domestic governance his administration handled competently.

Reagan was arguably worse than Harding or Nixon - Buchanan I'm not as familiar with.

None of them actually screwed up in every single area of administration, commiteed crimes in every sphere of influence possible, and made hash out of both foreign and domestic responsibility.

Homeland Security alone puts W in a class by himself, for bureaucratic boondoggle creation, for example. Not even the Pentagon matches it, and there was better excuse for the Pentagon.

Look at recovery time, as a measure of damage done: How long, do you think, before the US will (if it even can) recover its international status and balance its budget - let alone restrain its newly imperial executive branch ?

[Mr. Heskey]

Buchanan was in a bad situation not of his own making,



Exactly. Buchanan was the last president before the civil war broke out and he couldn't exactly do much of anything. The nation was literally already torn apart. Nixon and Clinton would've in my opinion been both good presidents had they not flat out lied to the country.

[The Machine]

I give you the picture perfect illustration of the problem. Disgust and hatred towards those who believe in a different American political ideology. This leads to a complete and utter inability to compromise which leads to the radical right gaining control of the Republican party and the radical left gaining control of the Democrats. Where are the moderates? Alot of conservatives used to declared themselves the silent majority, theyre not. The true silent majority is the moderates on both sides of the aisle that are being shut out by the party lines that consistantly move towards the extremes and alienate any person that seeks to express some level of independent thought.

I don't think you can label Bush the worst President in history yet, because history has not yet taken place, you need some time to look back and analyze policy outcomes from afar. I think in 2015 when we look back at this administration it will certainly be a contender for worst, atleast in the modern political age, say post WWI. I am almost certain that he will be a surefire lock for worst President in my lifetime up to this point. (Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II)

I somewhat agree with you on this one, if I could blame anything, I would blame the media. The hate is based on radicals, but it's because of constant mudslinging and media for allowing the radicals to express their views and sadly some people will believe them. Bush may not be so bad, the war in Iraq I know isn't that bad either. A friend of mine recently came back from Iraq and said that for every 1 bad thing that happens, 100 good things happen, but good things don't make the news. And for once, I won't be stubborn and I'll agree with someone who responded to my post :)



People like you two give northerners a bad name. You are the narrow minded ones in this case as you think someone that isn't a liberal or agrees with you must be stupid or narrow minded. The irony is fucking hilarious!!!!!

I'm from south carolina, is that northern to you?

[pantomime]

Completely true. But seriously, you have to blame the American people. If there weren't so many narrow-minded people (*cough* conservatives), we definately wouldn't have made such a bad decision on a president.

Haha, wtf.

Enough people liked him to elect him twice. You cant blame half of America for voting for him. How do you figure conservatives are any more narrow-minded than liberals?

And Trump is the most arrogant s.o.b. in all of existence.

[StCyril]

Completely true. But seriously, you have to blame the American people. If there weren't so many narrow-minded people (*cough* conservatives), we definately wouldn't have made such a bad decision on a president.

One more from the Liberal side (as though we need any more). You know, when is the last time we had a decent liberal in office? hmm? no??

Worst president?

What about Jimmah Cartah the peanut farmer from Georgia? Mr. Trump must have been in his heavy drug usage period Jimmah was in office.

I LOVE YOU! I totally agree, Bush isn't a good president, but Cartah was infinitely worse! The problems with Iran WERE STARTED BECAUSE OF CARTERS NON-EXISTANT FOREIGN POLICY!

Haha, wtf.

Enough people liked him to elect him twice. You cant blame half of America for voting for him. How do you figure conservatives are any more narrow-minded than liberals?

I think a lot of people thought they could do better, but who wanted to see John Kerry in office? The only people who wanted to see him in office are people like Hanoi Jane and her followers, you know, people who hate our troops. To put it simply, both liberals and conservatives have extremists, both have terrible views and both think the other is completely wrong. Though I have a very serious problem with those moronic liberals who throw fake blood and garbage at soldiers, yet call themselves peaceful protestors, NEITHER SIDE IS RIGHT!


Last but not least, ITS DONALD TRUMP! The most media coverage he ever got was at Rosie O'Donnel's expense, how pathetic is that?

[Nocturnal]

One more from the Liberal side (as though we need any more). You know, when is the last time we had a decent liberal in office? hmm? no??


The last decent Liberal? Hard to say. Clinton was the last decent Democrat, did a fine job.


I LOVE YOU! I totally agree, Bush isn't a good president, but Cartah was infinitely worse! The problems with Iran WERE STARTED BECAUSE OF CARTERS NON-EXISTANT FOREIGN POLICY!
Our problems with Iran started when we overthrew their government and replaced it with a brutal puppet regime.


I think a lot of people thought they could do better, but who wanted to see John Kerry in office? The only people who wanted to see him in office are people like Hanoi Jane and her followers, you know, people who hate our troops. To put it simply, both liberals and conservatives have extremists, both have terrible views and both think the other is completely wrong. Though I have a very serious problem with those moronic liberals who throw fake blood and garbage at soldiers, yet call themselves peaceful protestors, NEITHER SIDE IS RIGHT!


How can you say a man who served during Wartime hates our troops?

Also, please don't repeat those fables of "protestors spitting on our troops, or throwing blood". Those things never really happen, but the crazies love repeating them to make their enemies look bad.

If you wish to be taken seriously here, stating that the 50% of America that voted for Kerry "hates our troops" is not a wise course of action.

[TFS]

The last decent Liberal? Hard to say. Clinton was the last decent Democrat, did a fine job.

Our problems with Iran started when we overthrew their government and replaced it with a brutal puppet regime.


How can you say a man who served during Wartime hates our troops?

Also, please don't repeat those fables of "protestors spitting on our troops, or throwing blood". Those things never really happen, but the crazies love repeating them to make their enemies look bad.

If you wish to be taken seriously here, stating that the 50% of America that voted for Kerry "hates our troops" is not a wise course of action.

Actually it did happen to our Vietnam veterans. My economics teacher in high school was one of the ones that suffered from it.

His platoon was asked to march in a parade for either Memorial or Veterans day (can't remember which) and some guy splashed a cup of urine in his face.

So yeah, that shit did happen, and it does still happen but is nowhere near as common anymore.


And how can you say that a man that lied for political gain at the expense of POWs about the actions of soldiers he never saw committed has any real concern for the troops?