Bush Pulling Even With Obama

bush_cheney2004 · October 9, 2010

Hope and Change has met Reality, and former President George Bush can smirk all he wants now:

(CNN) - Americans are divided over whether President Barack Obama or his predecessor has performed better in the White House, according to a new national poll.

And a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday also indicates in the battle for Congress, Republicans hold large advantages over the Democrats among independents, men and blue-collar whites. The poll also indicates that Republicans are much more enthusiastic than Democrats to vote.

By 47 to 45 percent, Americans say Obama is a better president than George W. Bush. But that two point margin is down from a 23 point advantage one year ago.

"Democrats may want to think twice about bringing up former President George W. Bush's name while campaigning this year," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/08/cnntime-poll-was-bush-better-president-than-obama/

Edited October 9, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

liberaotrman2 · October 9, 2010

we do not recognize your sham political system.... obama is a BLACK PIG!

Shady · October 9, 2010

Yep, I think people are finally realizing what an incompetent neophyte Obama really is. And they're also remembering that 7 of the 8 years with Bush as President weren't too bad. An average of 5% unemployment and an average deficit of less than a third of what Obama's piling up. And right now, he's only making things worse. His whole economic team has left him after only 20 months in office. They see the train wreck, and they want no part of it. I can't say I blame them.

capricorn · October 9, 2010

Yep, I think people are finally realizing what an incompetent neophyte Obama really is.

I also think this will break a lot of Canadian hearts.

bush_cheney2004 · October 9, 2010

Yep, I think people are finally realizing what an incompetent neophyte Obama really is. And they're also remembering that 7 of the 8 years with Bush as President weren't too bad....

President Obama has been trapped by his own rhetoric and the anti-Bush tax cut demogogues of his own party. The most recent if not final straw is the way yet another retreat from a Bush policy has been shelved for political and economic expediency, adding to the list of Bush policies continued by the Obama administration.

Campaigning is fun....actual governance is not.

sharkman · October 9, 2010

Very true BC. I remember around here how the left would trumpet each new approval drop that Bush had, and when the numbers fell below 50 a collective war whoop went up. Funny how little those same numbers matter to them when it's Obama.

One of these years Obama will get enough experience under his belt to realize how bad he really is.

Edited October 9, 2010 by sharkman

BubberMiley · October 9, 2010

I remember around here how the left would trumpet each new approval drop that Bush had, and when the numbers fell below 50 a collective war whoop went up.

How else do you categorize large groups of people, other than "the left?" Do you further classify them into "the jews", "the blacks", and "the gays?"

sharkman · October 9, 2010

Nope, just the left. You may notice now that I've brought it to your attention that many on the left refer to a group they call, "the right". I wouldn't worry about that either.

Moonlight Graham · October 10, 2010

By 47 to 45 percent, Americans say Obama is a better president than George W. Bush. But that two point margin is down from a 23 point advantage one year ago.

Wow, Americans sure have a short-term memory.

Obama's stimulus package has overall been mostly a failure and he has continued some of the inane policies of Bush, but anyone with half a brain can see he's better than Mr. trainwreck. I guess people forget Bush was the guy who presided over the economic collapse in the first place.

BubberMiley · October 10, 2010

Nope, just the left.

So oversimplified generalizations and stereotyping are fine if it is furthering your cause of dividing the population into opposing camps.

Polarizing politics are always an effective strategy, but you run the risk of alienating more than you attract.

bush_cheney2004 · October 10, 2010

...Obama's stimulus package has overall been mostly a failure and he has continued some of the inane policies of Bush, but anyone with half a brain can see he's better than Mr. trainwreck. I guess people forget Bush was the guy who presided over the economic collapse in the first place.

Your comment only supports the poll swing, as even Americans with short memories know that Bush's TARP (rebranded by Obama) was largely successful is staving off a banking system collapse and is being paid back, while the "stimulus" package politically associated with Obama is just as you describe.

If presidents "preside" over collapse (even though they don't), then they also preside over recovery (or in this case, no recovery).

Edited October 10, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

naomiglover · October 10, 2010

Bush may have preached 'lower taxes' but his spending was through the roof. How can you lower taxes when you're going to spend billions on unnecessary wars and a big government?

Don't you guys realize that you're always cheering for and going against two teams that are pretty much the same? Put down the pompoms and start looking for alternatives to the same people you keep alternating in the office.

kimmy · October 10, 2010

Put down the pompoms and start looking for alternatives to the same people you keep alternating in the office.

Ross Perot 2012!!

-k

Pliny · October 10, 2010

Bush may have preached 'lower taxes' but his spending was through the roof. How can you lower taxes when you're going to spend billions on unnecessary wars and a big government?

Don't you guys realize that you're always cheering for and going against two teams that are pretty much the same? Put down the pompoms and start looking for alternatives to the same people you keep alternating in the office.

Tea party. Yeah!

bush_cheney2004 · October 10, 2010

....Don't you guys realize that you're always cheering for and going against two teams that are pretty much the same? Put down the pompoms and start looking for alternatives to the same people you keep alternating in the office.

Right...it's so much better cheering for the Liberals, Conservatives or NDP in Canada. And let's not forget the one-track separatist party just for Quebec!

sharkman · October 10, 2010

Bush may have preached 'lower taxes' but his spending was through the roof. How can you lower taxes when you're going to spend billions on unnecessary wars and a big government?

Don't you guys realize that you're always cheering for and going against two teams that are pretty much the same? Put down the pompoms and start looking for alternatives to the same people you keep alternating in the office.

You look at one Republican and then conclude that they're all the same? Sorry, I don't concur. Yes, Bush was a spender, but that does not prove your theory.

Pliny · October 10, 2010

You look at one Republican and then conclude that they're all the same? Sorry, I don't concur. Yes, Bush was a spender, but that does not prove your theory.

The two parties do like to spend, and that they have in common. What they spend it on is not always the same. Although Bush did have some of the caring-sharing compassionate leanings of liberals on social problems that he thought government could best assuage.

punked · October 11, 2010

You look at one Republican and then conclude that they're all the same? Sorry, I don't concur. Yes, Bush was a spender, but that does not prove your theory.

How about the biggest expansion of government ever happening under Reagan?

Edited October 11, 2010 by punked

bush_cheney2004 · October 11, 2010

How about the biggest expansion of government ever happening under Reagan?

False....American history says otherwise...going back to the Civil War:

http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=360

punked · October 11, 2010

False....American history says otherwise...going back to the Civil War:

http://www.independent.org/publications/article.asp?id=360

No whatever that was, was talking about government powers and spending.

bush_cheney2004 · October 11, 2010

No whatever that was, was talking about government powers and spending.

That would be "expansion of government", not only in magnitude, but in setting the stage for additional federal revenue and spending. See "Income Tax" and FDR's New Deal. President Reagan only continued the trend.

Clearly the US federal government expanded the most during the Civil War.

naomiglover · October 11, 2010

You look at one Republican and then conclude that they're all the same? Sorry, I don't concur. Yes, Bush was a spender, but that does not prove your theory.

It's not a theory. It's what the system is about.

Kennedy/Johnson (1961-1964)

Spending Grew by 6.5% YoY (Year over Year)

Spending Grew by 5.28% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

Lyndon B. Johnson (1965-1968)

Spending Grew by 10.93% YoY

Spending Grew by 7.74% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

Richard Nixon (1969-1972)

Spending Grew by 6.7% YoY

Spending Grew by 1.97% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

Nixon/Ford (1973-1976)

Spending Grew by 12.85% YoY

Spending Grew by 4.44% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

Jimmy Carter (1977-1980)

Spending Grew by 12.32% YoY

Spending Grew by 2.37% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

Ronald Reagan, First Term (1981-1984)

Spending Grew by 9.62% YoY

Spending Grew by 3.46% YoY (Inflation Adjusted

Ronald Reagan, Second Term (1985-1988)

Spending Grew by 5.79% YoY

Spending Grew by 2.33% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

George H. W. Bush (1989-1992)

Spending Grew by 6.75% YoY

Spending Grew by 2.24% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

Bill Clinton, First Term (1993-1996)

Spending Grew by 3.1% YoY

Spending Grew by 0.31% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

Bill Clinton, Second Term (1997-2000)

Spending Grew by 3.48% YoY

Spending Grew by 1.15% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

George W. Bush, First Term (2001-2004)

Spending Grew by 6.41% YoY

Spending Grew by 4.02% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

George W. Bush, Second Term (2005-2008)

Spending Grew by 6.82% YoY

Spending Grew by 3.4% YoY (Inflation Adjusted)

Barack Obama (2009-2012)

Spending Expected to Grow by 6.71% YoY (according to White House projections)

Put down the pompom's. They're all the same.

bush_cheney2004 · October 11, 2010

....Put down the pompom's. They're all the same.

Well...ummm....yeah...they're all Americans!

BubberMiley · October 11, 2010

It seems nobody wants old GWB working for them on the campaign trail. I guess that resounding defeat of John Kerry six years ago has worn pretty thin. :lol:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/09/george-w-bush-holed-up-in_n_757084.html

Edited October 11, 2010 by BubberMiley

bush_cheney2004 · October 11, 2010

It seems nobody wants old GWB working for them on the campaign trail. I guess that resounding defeat of John Kerry six years ago has worn pretty thin.

Same as Bill Clinton in 2000.....great strategy Mr. Gore!