George W. Bush or Barack Obama?

[Donald Trump’s Toupée]

Bush gets my vote. He's ridiculously under rated.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Obama. Bush is unfairly maligned in some areas (I really don't think he was as unmitigatedly awful as Buchanan, for instance) but he was still pretty bad in my opinion.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I hope you're not serious.

Obama, of course.

[tmthforu94]

Bush

[Mechaman]

12 gauge shot to the face/44 magnum shot to the back of the skull

At the time the 12 gauge shot seemed logical, considering the wide spread of a shotgun blast.  However it only left me a rotting living vegetable who looked like that dumbf**k kid who tried to blow his head off after listening to Judas Priest whereas the 44 magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world could blow my head clean off, would've been a lot quicker and painless.

[nclib]

Obama by a mile. And Bush deserved the blame he got.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Please ban anyone who says Republican hacks dominate this forum.  K?  Thx.

[Napoleon]

Obama!

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Bush

Same--unless a option for ANYONE else exist....

[Bo]

Barack Hussein Obama II

[opebo]

Bush destroyed the country.

[bgwah]

Obama, though thus far he's been fairly similar to Bush's second term. Oh well.

[opebo]

Obama, though thus far he's been fairly similar to Bush's second term. Oh well.

Yes, only the two right-wing choices.

[The Mikado]

I felt a small amount of pity for W at the end, just like I do for Barry.  They both face problems bigger than they are, that are bigger than anyone is.

[memphis]

I felt a small amount of pity for W at the end, just like I do for Barry.  They both face problems bigger than they are, that are bigger than anyone is.

Most of Bush's problems were completely of his own making. Granted, he couldn't do much about 9/11 or Katrina, but Iraq was his choice. Turning surpluses into massive deficits was his choice. It's like he went out of his way to detroy America whenever possible. Obama has plenty on his plate, but it's hard to get things done with the GOP trying to stop him every step of the way.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Obama, though thus far he's been fairly similar to Bush's second term. Oh well.

Bush probably wouldn't be too controversial if he had governed the whole time like his second term, his only real conservative accomplishment was his two Supreme Court appointments. One could even make a reasonable argument that he was basically center-left in the second half of it after the Democrats took Congress, his immigration reform plan was certainly less popular amongst Republicans and while there were opponents on both sides to TARP and the bailouts, he worked better with the Democrats on them, not to mention what he did with the auto makers which was almost universally opposed by Republicans, plus some of his actions toward the environment were pretty decent. Democrats just weren't willing to forgive him (rightfully I must add) for Iraq and other things he bungled.

Bush certainly deserves to go down as one of the worst Presidents in US history, but it's not too hard to see him as not too bad in comparison to the Tea Party people. Of course he's largely responsible for their creation as the populist discontent toward his fiscal policies just manifested itself and became the Tea Party while a black Democrat held the presidency. That said Obama is obviously still light years ahead of him.

Perhaps a good analogy is that Bush was Emperor Gestahl and the Tea Party is Kefka?

[memphis]

Obama, though thus far he's been fairly similar to Bush's second term. Oh well.

Bush probably wouldn't be too controversial if he had governed the whole time like his second term, his only real conservative accomplishment was his two Supreme Court appointments. One could even make a reasonable argument that he was basically center-left in the second half of it after the Democrats took Congress, his immigration reform plan was certainly less popular amongst Republicans and while there were opponents on both sides to TARP and the bailouts, he worked better with the Democrats on them, not to mention what he did with the auto makers which was almost universally opposed by Republicans, plus some of his actions toward the environment were pretty decent. Democrats just weren't willing to forgive him (rightfully I must add) for Iraq and other things he bungled.

Bush certainly deserves to go down as one of the worst Presidents in US history, but it's not too hard to see him as not too bad in comparison to the Tea Party people. Of course he's largely responsible for their creation as the populist discontent toward his fiscal policies just manifested itself and became the Tea Party while a black Democrat held the presidency. That said Obama is obviously still light years ahead of him.

Perhaps a good analogy is that Bush was Emperor Gestahl and the Tea Party is Kefka?

Bush had exactly 0% to do with the formation of the teabaggers.  They are 100% about being opposed to Obama.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Is there an option None of the above?

Like someone else said on here, Obama is a third Bush term. He doesn't lead. All he wants to do is get rid of all the partisanship in Washington, which is a noble cause, but it isn't going to happen and he just needs to realize that the Republicans do not like him and do not want to work with him and only care about his political demise. The sooner he realizes this and flips them the bird and actually starts standing up for principles upon which he was elected, the better off we'll be in the long run.

But Obama knows how to give a good speech and eloquently construct a simple declarative sentence without making any stumbles or grammatical errors, so I guess that gives him a leg up on Dubya.

[DrScholl]

Obama. Whatever one's grievance is with Obama, Bush was clearly very detrimental to the long term good of the country.

[courts]

Well, obviously I wouldn't vote for Bush but he had better judicial choices IMO. And he still spent less and waged less wars in his eight years than Obama's current term even if he technically started the first two wars Obama inherited. So I guess he's better by default.

[tpfkaw]

Well, obviously I wouldn't vote for Bush, but he had better judicial choices IMO. And he still spent less and waged fewer wars in his eight years than Obama's current term, even if he technically started the first two wars Obama inherited. So I guess he's better by default.

[Brandon H]

If I had to pick, Bush. However, if I could get Obama with a Republican House and Senate, I might go for that.

[Reaganfan]

Here is my honest take on Bush, from a personal perspective.

In 2000, my entire immediate family was for George Bush. My mother was 32 years old, and was a fan of Reagan and loved George H.W. Bush when she was my age. I actually have some memories of her being disappointed as Bill Clinton took office in 1993. She voted for Dole even though the talk was that Clinton would win easy, so 2000 was the first election I REALLY followed. My mother allowed me to miss an hour of school in the morning, November 7, 2000, so I could go into the voting booth with her and she allowed me to punch the ballot for Bush (Apparently a 12-year old in Ohio does it better than Seniors in Florida).

I never really considered the prospect of Bush losing, which looking back, was a bad thing because had he not been elected, my 12 year old heart would have been greatly crushed. I was fed by the fact that all you heard about in the media was Bush, and the fact that since 4th grade, he had been ahead, sometimes massively, in polls.

Examples:

May 1998
USA Today/CNN/Gallup

Bush: 50%
Gore: 46%

September 1999
ABC News/Washington Post

Bush: 56%
Gore: 37%

June 2000
Times Poll


Bush: 50%
Gore: 40%

So in 4th grade, we would discuss in class the likelihood that George W. Bush would be the next President. Then in 5th grade, by September 1999 in Student Council, I knew Bush was almost 20 points ahead of Gore. Then throughout 2000, Bush usually held an edge, sometimes significantly.

It really wasn't until the final months that Gore ended up showing much stronger than anybody thought. I remember Bush campaigning in New Jersey and putting money in California and leading in Illinois and Delaware at times. It was insane. Bush even took a "day off" from campaigning in the final week. A very dangerous strategy.

Anyways, he won and took office. I remember taping the inauguration on NBC (I have the tape and will YouTube it soon, BTW) and my mother came home from work that Saturday and I remember saying, "So I taped President Bush for you. It was the first time I said the name President Bush to her and she smiled. It was great.

Well, the rest of 2001 flew by until September 11th. I remember watching NBC in my Middle School class and wondering what my parents were thinking, ect. Then I thought about Bush and Cheney and to be honest, I don't remember thinking much about politics between the inauguration and 9/11. After that, Bush's support from me only solidified throughout the first term, and then he got re-elected. After that, Iraq got worse, the economy went south, and the 2008 election began almost instantly and my own life got busier. So I think I judge Bush more on the first term and reaction to 9/11 more than anything else.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Bush had exactly 0% to do with the formation of the teabaggers.  They are 100% about being opposed to Obama.

Agreed.  I actually think W likes Obama.  And why shouldn't he, Obama's foreign policy is such a stark contrast to Bush's (except Iraq......Bush wanted to do what Obama did in Afghanistan).

[Zarn]

Obama, though thus far he's been fairly similar to Bush's second term. Oh well.

Bush probably wouldn't be too controversial if he had governed the whole time like his second term, his only real conservative accomplishment was his two Supreme Court appointments. One could even make a reasonable argument that he was basically center-left in the second half of it after the Democrats took Congress, his immigration reform plan was certainly less popular amongst Republicans and while there were opponents on both sides to TARP and the bailouts, he worked better with the Democrats on them, not to mention what he did with the auto makers which was almost universally opposed by Republicans, plus some of his actions toward the environment were pretty decent. Democrats just weren't willing to forgive him (rightfully I must add) for Iraq and other things he bungled.

Bush certainly deserves to go down as one of the worst Presidents in US history, but it's not too hard to see him as not too bad in comparison to the Tea Party people. Of course he's largely responsible for their creation as the populist discontent toward his fiscal policies just manifested itself and became the Tea Party while a black Democrat held the presidency. That said Obama is obviously still light years ahead of him.

Perhaps a good analogy is that Bush was Emperor Gestahl and the Tea Party is Kefka?

Bush had exactly 0% to do with the formation of the teabaggers.  They are 100% about being opposed to Obama.

The first tea partiers were libertarians. So unless there is a distinction between tea partier and "teabagger" to you, your statement is false.