AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Worst President in History?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Worst President in History? - Page 3  

post #81 of 1703
4/23/06 at 8:04pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
But, it isn't the majority opinion that confers this "wrongness" upon him. That is the point. He is not wrong because the majority believe he is. Which is a common fallacy.

Maybe I missed it, but could you explain how we know a leader's actions are "wrong" if it is not through consensus?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #82 of 1703
4/24/06 at 5:41am
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
But, it isn't the majority opinion that confers this "wrongness" upon him. That is the point. He is not wrong because the majority believe he is. Which is a common fallacy.



Nothing to get over Sparky.

Uh, Chris read the polls. Bush has become very unpopular among the american people. Why? Because they don't agree with his actions. They think he's wrong.

Their opinions of right and wrong are just as valid as yours ( there's just more of them ). They ( myself included ) know he's wrong.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
post #83 of 1703
4/24/06 at 8:55am
Quote:
Originally posted by jimmac
Uh, Chris read the polls. Bush has become very unpopular among the american people. Why? Because they don't agree with his actions. They think he's wrong.

Their opinions of right and wrong are just as valid as yours ( there's just more of them ). They ( myself included ) know he's wrong.

Again...

unpopular != wrong
popular != right

unpopular = unpopular
popular = popular

Just because a lot of people think/believe/opine something is right/wrong doesn't make it so (in either direction).

As to Bush specifically, pick something. Take something specific that "Bush is 'wrong' about" and then we could have a rational (perhaps) discussion.

Just saying "he is wrong" in absense of a specific thing is just stupid.
post #84 of 1703
4/24/06 at 8:56am
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Maybe I missed it, but could you explain how we know a leader's actions are "wrong" if it is not through consensus?

mid...I expect you to be able to grok this. Its really not too hard or obtuse.
post #85 of 1703
4/24/06 at 9:28am
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
mid...I expect you to be able to grok this. Its really not too hard or obtuse.

No, I (we) expect you to grok this. If majority (consensus) opinion is not relevant, then we might as well abolish the entire democratic order of the country and install an autocratic regime.

Then we could have a popular/unpopular leader rule for as long as he/she wants, majority opinion notwithstanding.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
post #86 of 1703
4/24/06 at 9:43am
Bush is the best president since Bill Clinton.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
post #87 of 1703
4/24/06 at 9:46am
OK. So, let's take another approach here. On election day 2004 (or 1972 for Nixon, or 1980/1984 for Reagan) would you say that Bush was "right" because a majority of the people voted for (and, through consensus, "approved" of him and thought he was "right")?
post #88 of 1703
4/24/06 at 10:00am
Can someone name 3 things Bush has done to help the average American of average income?
post #89 of 1703
4/24/06 at 10:06am
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
Can someone name 3 things Bush has done to help the average American of average income?

How about we post a poll asking the members of the forums whether their income is up, down or the same since Bush became president in 2000?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #90 of 1703
4/24/06 at 10:10am
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
How about we post a poll asking the members of the forums whether their income is up, down or the same since Bush became president in 2000?

Nick

That isn't really relevant is it? Has inflation been flat for the last six years?

(And he became president in 2001.)
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
post #91 of 1703
4/24/06 at 10:13am
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
How about we post a poll asking the members of the forums whether their income is up, down or the same since Bush became president in 2000?

Nick

This is not a bulleted list.
post #92 of 1703
4/24/06 at 10:16am
Quote:
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
That isn't really relevant is it? Has inflation been flat for the last six years?

(And he became president in 2001.)

By historical measures inflation has been rather flat. We have even had a period where there was a fear we would slip into deflation. However people are welcome to state whether adjusted for inflation they feel like their incomes have gone up, down or stayed the same as well.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #93 of 1703
4/24/06 at 10:22am
Quote:
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
That isn't really relevant is it? Has inflation been flat for the last six years?

(And he became president in 2001.)

Right-o. And check this out: http://www.raptureready.com/rap2.html

Record High 182 (24 Sept 01) Close to a year after Bush being elected

Record Low 57 (12 Dec 93) A year after 'Slick Willy' was elected.

Even the rapture crowd agrees: WJC > GWB
post #94 of 1703
4/24/06 at 10:43am
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
This is not a bulleted list.

The easiest one is that home ownership is at a record high.

I can think more easily of the ones that apply to myself. The capital gains cut has helped me take home more money both from real estate and stock sales. I assume millions of others have benefitted from this as well.

The child tax credit was raised from $600 to $1000 per child. Since I have 2 children, this is $800 more dollars per year that I can apply towards my taxes or receive back.

The average unemployment rate for the first five years of the Bush administration was 5.42%. The same rate for the first five years of the Clinton administration was 5.78%. Considering Bush did come into a weakening economy and rising unemployment rate as well as the experiencing the economic damage related to the terrorist attacks, I think this quite an achievement. Clinton did have yearly unemployment rates of 4.5, 4.2 and 4.0% for the last few years in office. We obviously don't have that data for Bush yet but the current rate being 4.7% and trending down does hold promise.

How are those to start? Not that anyone has done me the same courtesy in actually addressing the points I raised in about the article on which this thread is based, but I guess people in denial don't like things like facts, data, people pointing out that opinion pieces, even from historians, don't add up to much, etc.

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #95 of 1703
4/24/06 at 11:13am
Lowering taxes and giving raising tax breaks are great, for now. How do you expect to be paying for a war that will end up costing 1 trillion dollars? Printing more money covertly?

This money will need to be paid back to our creditors. By raising taxes to an exorbitant amount, probably by someone with the guts to do it, i.e. a Democrat. I guess it's all part of the plan. It'll give people a reason to demonize another Dem that tries to clean up the mess left behind by the last administration.

I hope a republican gets in the white house in 2008. I really do.
post #96 of 1703
4/24/06 at 12:32pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
Can someone name 3 things Bush has done to help the average American of average income?

He has awaken the most apathetic individual in America to realize holly shit this guy is not right.

He has made my Christian faith stronger, I now realize there is actually an anti-Christ.

Beach front property in New Orleans is cheaper then it has been in 30 years.
I've seen things you little people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion bright as magnesium. I rode on the back decks of a blinker and watched c-beams glitter in the...
I've seen things you little people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion bright as magnesium. I rode on the back decks of a blinker and watched c-beams glitter in the...
post #97 of 1703
4/24/06 at 12:47pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
Right-o. And check this out: http://www.raptureready.com/rap2.html

Record High 182 (24 Sept 01) Close to a year after Bush being elected

Record Low 57 (12 Dec 93) A year after 'Slick Willy' was elected.

Even the rapture crowd agrees: WJC > GWB

You follow the wrong master my friend. Bush doesn't follow Gods will, word, he is a reptile. An individual designed to lure you away. Jesus doesn't advocate war, greed or lust for power. Be mindfull, never promote a man, it will always be his will not Gods.
I've seen things you little people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion bright as magnesium. I rode on the back decks of a blinker and watched c-beams glitter in the...
I've seen things you little people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion bright as magnesium. I rode on the back decks of a blinker and watched c-beams glitter in the...
post #98 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:13pm
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
How about we post a poll asking the members of the forums whether their income is up, down or the same since Bush became president in 2000?

Nick

NET income, sure.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #99 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:16pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
Right-o. And check this out: http://www.raptureready.com/rap2.html

Record High 182 (24 Sept 01) Close to a year after Bush being elected

Record Low 57 (12 Dec 93) A year after 'Slick Willy' was elected.

Even the rapture crowd agrees: WJC > GWB

I think you misunderstand...the rapture crowd wants it to happen. They fantasize about it (Left Behind? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?).
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #100 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:24pm
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I think you misunderstand...the rapture crowd wants it to happen. They fantasize about it (Left Behind? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?).

No I totally understand. I just think it's ironic in an Alannis Morrisette sort of way.
post #101 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:25pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
No I totally understand. I just think it's ironic in an Alannis Morrisette sort of way.

Gotcha. I was just saying that it's not WJC>GWB...it's the other way around.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #102 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:37pm
I need to start qualifying things with a winky-smiley face more often
post #103 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:39pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
I need to start qualifying things with a winky-smiley face more often

I'm confused now. Does that mean that you don't actually mean that you need to qualify with a winky-smiley face?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #104 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:44pm
Should be:

Quote:
I need to start qualifying things with a winky-smiley face more often

Forgot to negate the first smiley with a second.
post #105 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:46pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
Should be:



Forgot to negate the first smiley with a second.

Smiley double negatives! Hah!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #106 of 1703
4/24/06 at 1:56pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
mid...I expect you to be able to grok this. Its really not too hard or obtuse.

I'm just trying to figure out what the hell people are arguing, which is why I asked how we judge "badness" if it is not by consensus. Additionally, I don't know where "popularity" or "wrongness" entered into this discussion, but Bush's tanking numbers are job approval, not popularity; people simply don't think he's doing the right thing and then, on top of that, they don't think he's doing a good job of whatever it is he's doing.

And I understand your point that just because a majority of people disagree with an action it is not ipso facto "wrong" or "bad" or whatever. But I'm curious how, since you seem to advocate immediate historical conext and possibly longer-term historical context, how we are to judge anything.

And that's what I asked. It's a serious question.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #107 of 1703
4/24/06 at 2:26pm
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I'm just trying to figure out what the hell people are arguing, which is why I asked how we judge "badness" if it is not by consensus.

I didn't think it was "badness" (i.e., popularity) but instead the unqualified certainty that Bush is "wrong" (or "not right") (about what exactly has been vaguely glossed over). And the assumption that this unpopularity automatically means that what he is doing is wrong or bad because of the unpopularity.

Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
people simply don't think he's doing the right thing and then, on top of that, they don't think he's doing a good job of whatever it is he's doing.

OK...this is closer to the core.

My point (and you seem to agree) is that just because "people simply don't think he's doing the right thing" doesn't (in fact) mean he actually is not doing the right thing(s). It simply reflects many people's opinion of what he is doing.

In many people's opinion he's "not doing the right thing(s)" and/or "not doing a good job". Fine. No problem. But this opinion (no matter how widely held) doesn't make it so.

If we could find reasonable, objective measures (even relative to others who've held the same job...for example common economic indicators, whatever, etc.)...then we might be able to get much closer to a more quantifiable statement of something like "President Bush is doing a worse job than any other President at handling X as indicated by A, B and C."

Instead all we have is a bunch of people saying "I think (subjectively) he's doing a bad job" and a bunch of other people saying "well he must be (it's a 'fact') doing a bad job because so many people think he is doing a bad job."
post #108 of 1703
4/24/06 at 2:40pm
Are you attempting to argue a post-modern point with a liberal arts academic?

Good luck, Chris.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
post #109 of 1703
4/24/06 at 2:55pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
Lowering taxes and giving raising tax breaks are great, for now. How do you expect to be paying for a war that will end up costing 1 trillion dollars? Printing more money covertly?

What makes you think they are doing it covertly?

Quote:
This money will need to be paid back to our creditors. By raising taxes to an exorbitant amount, probably by someone with the guts to do it, i.e. a Democrat. I guess it's all part of the plan. It'll give people a reason to demonize another Dem that tries to clean up the mess left behind by the last administration.

It probably won't be paid back. I've been of the opinion for quite a while that our government will probably print away the problems. I fully expect an episode of either hyper-inflation or at least a half to full decade of strong inflation. The people who are the creditors will be hurt but since they obtained many of those surpluses via intentional currency manipulation, what else can you expect?

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #110 of 1703
4/24/06 at 3:05pm
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I'm just trying to figure out what the hell people are arguing, which is why I asked how we judge "badness" if it is not by consensus. Additionally, I don't know where "popularity" or "wrongness" entered into this discussion, but Bush's tanking numbers are job approval, not popularity; people simply don't think he's doing the right thing and then, on top of that, they don't think he's doing a good job of whatever it is he's doing.

And I understand your point that just because a majority of people disagree with an action it is not ipso facto "wrong" or "bad" or whatever. But I'm curious how, since you seem to advocate immediate historical conext and possibly longer-term historical context, how we are to judge anything.

And that's what I asked. It's a serious question.

It's clear to me at least, that approval ratings often mirror how popular a president happens to be. Clinton had his approval ratings move dramatically higher when he was mired in the Lewinsky scandal and subsequent impeachment. I seriously doubt it meant that people approved of the his conduct. Rather it meant people wanted to rally behind and support him just because he was the president. You could say the same thing about Bush right after 9/11. It isn't as if people approve of our government not catching terrorists flying planes into buildings. However people want to support the president.

Also I'm not saying that we can't judge anything about a president. However this isn't what is being put forward. Instead what is being asked is how a president doing on the job while the job is still half done. Additionally we are being asked to judge that half finished job against the context of others who have had time to finish their job. (Must fight analogy )

Nick

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

post #111 of 1703
4/24/06 at 3:14pm
Bush has two more years of "history" to lay...

Comparitively, most second term presidents have actually done something by this point...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
post #112 of 1703
4/24/06 at 3:15pm
A great/funny exchange from The American President:

Lewis Rothschild: Mood swings? Nineteen post-graduate degrees in mathematics, and your best explanation for going from a 63 to a 46 percent approval rating in five weeks is mood swings?

Leon Kodak: Well, I could explain it better, but I'd need charts, and graphs, and an easel.

post #113 of 1703
4/24/06 at 3:39pm
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Quote:
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
Bush has two more years of "history" to lay...

Comparitively, most second term presidents have actually done something by this point...

Saying he has done nothing is ignorant. Sure, he may have done nothing that you like, but he hasn't done nothing.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #114 of 1703
4/24/06 at 3:48pm
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
It probably won't be paid back. I've been of the opinion for quite a while that our government will probably print away the problems. I fully expect an episode of either hyper-inflation or at least a half to full decade of strong inflation. The people who are the creditors will be hurt but since they obtained many of those surpluses via intentional currency manipulation, what else can you expect?

What if it doesn't play out like this senario you posted above? Is there a plan B?
post #115 of 1703
4/24/06 at 4:26pm
Quote:
Originally posted by hardeeharhar
Are you attempting to argue a post-modern point with a liberal arts academic?

Good luck, Chris.

That would be someone with degrees in dead white people men studies.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #116 of 1703
4/24/06 at 4:40pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
I didn't think it was "badness" (i.e., popularity) but instead the unqualified certainty that Bush is "wrong" (or "not right") (about what exactly has been vaguely glossed over). And the assumption that this unpopularity automatically means that what he is doing is wrong or bad because of the unpopularity.

Gotcha. Although it's a chicken and the egg, isn't it? Is it bad because it's bad or because people think it's bad? What if someone does something bad and no one thinks its bad? What if someone does something right and no one thinks it's right?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming that you come down on the side of some kind of Platonic/essentialist idea that there is a definite, describable, and objectively verifiable "good," right?

I don't want to turn this into a philosophical argument—especially since pfflam is back and will kick my ass for being such a dilettante about philosophy—but here's where I go all pomo on you: how do we know the good when we see it? And how can that recognition be independent of cultural/historical context?

Anyway, my point is that the "wrong" is the unpopular is the momentarily defined. My postmodernism makes that much more paletable because I'm comfy with the idea that the notion of "wrong" is culturally defined and will change. So it's possible that Bush will be regarded as having been "wrong" for 100 years and then suddenly be viewed as right.

But that's revisionist history.

Quote:
My point (and you seem to agree) is that just because "people simply don't think he's doing the right thing" doesn't (in fact) mean he actually is not doing the right thing(s). It simply reflects many people's opinion of what he is doing.

As I said above, when enough people think you're doing the wrong thing, you're doing the wrong thing, since "wrong thing" is culturally and historically determined.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #117 of 1703
4/24/06 at 4:46pm
Quote:
Originally posted by trumptman
Instead what is being asked is how a president doing on the job while the job is still half done.

Well, potentially, a president's actions affect everyone, everywhere, for the rest of human history. I'm not being pedantic here; I'm just saying that if we can't evaluate jobs in progress, we can't evaluate anything. And for a position as influential as the presidency, shouldn't we be very careful every step of the way? I know that Bush keeps saying he has a plan (wasn't that his stock answer in the 2000 campaign?) and that history will judge him (it already is) and that he is thinking beyond his presidency (no shit, sherlock), but to then turn around and say "Well, the job's not done! How can we evaluate him if the job's not done!" is more than a little naive, I think.


Quote:
Additionally we are being asked to judge that half finished job against the context of others who have had time to finish their job.

How is he being judged "against the context of others"? His ratings are being compared to his ratings. 1/3 of the country thinks he's doing a good job. 2/3 of the country is having buyer's remorse—remember, the conventional wisdom was that we'd elect him so he could finish the job he started. Neither the job nor the finishing seem to be going that well.

Quote:
(Must fight analogy )

It is much appreciated.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #118 of 1703
4/24/06 at 5:13pm
Quote:
Originally posted by BR
Saying he has done nothing is ignorant. Sure, he may have done nothing that you like, but he hasn't done nothing.

I thought the good was implied... but whatever?
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
post #119 of 1703
4/24/06 at 5:14pm
Well, he did finish the job he started. It's just not a type job that people can easily see, or, for that matter, even understand.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
post #120 of 1703
4/24/06 at 5:50pm
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
"wrong thing" is culturally and historically determined.

I disagree. Sorry. \
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › The Worst President in History?