When some person or group fucks up, it’s not the fault of the people who tried, and failed, to prevent the fuck up, it’s the fault of the people who fucked up!
That spot will forever be held by Barack Obama. Don’t kid yourself.
…and now back to our regular programming.
Not a single historian will ever conclude that Obama’s presidency was worse than that of George W. Bush, you fucking chimpanzee.
Perish the thought. Kidding us is clearly your prerogative.
:dubious:
I’m sure that’s self-evident to you, but for the rest of us, we’ll need some details and examples of why you believe he can be called, objectively, the worst president ever. Which, given your long history here, I know will never be forthcoming.
W literally made me cry. I felt humiliated, ashamed and appalled that we killed 100,000 (?) innocent civilians in Iraq, 4000+ of our own soldiers, plus the tens or hundreds of thousands of terrible injuries on all sides. All to make the whole region arguably far worse, infested with emboldened terrorist groups throughout.
And it cost trillions. It destabilized this country- had the basic GOP policy been something other than an overall baseline contempt for the general population, had we devoted our resources to benefiting Americans instead of uselessly invading foreign countries, the financial crash would have been less severe or maybe never happened, the deficit would be smaller, the country would be less divided and less distrustful.
Inequality would be less severe without the awful policies of the W administration. Social problems pretty much just simmered unattended- 1000s of poor people continued to be locked up unnecessarily in the War on Drugs (Clinton didn’t help that either), the health care system’s problems was met with a big shrug because, hey, wealthy people benefited. The job losses that are driving rural or formerly industrial areas nuts today have their roots in W’s watch, or earlier (everything isn’t W’s fault).
And he presented as a complete dumbass. The Iraq War was more than enough to make me weep, but there was so much more to disappoint about W. I realize this country already had Vietnam, we’d already nuked Japan unnecessarily, all that Shining City on the Hill talk was already just that- talk. But a whole new generation learned that the US can’t be expected to the right thing, globally or for its own people. No matter what the people cry out for, even when there are unprecedented worldwide protests, somehow the wealthy always find a way to pervert our nation’s course of action into something bad. It is an historic tragedy, bigger than identifying “liberals” and “conservatives”, but W was a grade-A figurehead of the whole awful phenomenon.
So far, Trump just makes me go :smack::smack::smack: To be great, it seems he will have to do a 180 on policy, and another 180 as a person, but it isn’t too late. As others have said, he seems too incompetent to cause as much harm as W, and has not so far done so. But he still has a lot of time to go. None of this makes W look especially good.
That said, from the POV of a legislator like Pelosi, I bet W was at least easier to work with…
He had that title wrapped up as soon as he put his hand on the Bible in January. Still not sure why it didn’t burst into flame.
W sucked ass, to be sure. But to be fair, he was not a bigoted man. And he did not seek to profit from the presidency. And he damn well would have been upset had he found out that Russia had interfered in the election.
This is pretty much the argument I make whenever someone claims either Obama or Bush were the Worst President Evar. Most of these people can’t remember a president before Reagan, let alone anyone in the 19th century besides Lincoln (interestingly, Lincoln fell in the middle of a long streak of phenomenally bad presidents running from W H Harrison to Grant, with only Lincoln and Polk being the positive exceptions to the trend).
Okay, now you’re trolling us. There is no objective metric by which Trump will be considered great, based on experience thus far.
It says that the Republicans are experienced propagandists and the Democrats aren’t.
I still struggle to figure out why this person is allowed to keep posting here.
You can’t fix stupid. That was easy.
Case in point.
Covfefe, tweeted the hairy yam.
Or, it shows that over half of the electorate was smart enough to reject Kerry in 2004 and his extreme, ultra-liberal policies, as well as rejecting John Edwards as a potential vice-president.
John Edwards, a man who cheated on his wife while she was sick with cancer, and had a baby with his mistress, threw his staffer under the bus and ordered him to lie and say it was his kid, not Edwards’s, and then actually continued the affair even after the media revealed it. Yeah, what a peach. Is that really the man we should have elected to be a heartbeat away from being President?
America dodged a bullet by rejecting Kerry in 2004. Bush’s re-election was the right thing for the country.
W. made his father look good. Like a goddamn prophet, even.
Trump makes W. look good?
Heaven help us if the next guy makes Trump look good.
You’ve been here 17 years and the dope has done nothing to help you with your personal fight against ignorance. We’ve failed you. I am sorry, but it’s not like we haven’t tried.
Bruiser1036 = Octopus?
Meanwhile, in the far-off, distant year of right fucking now, we can ask any historian how kind history has been to Bush’s record after a little over 8 years of hindsight. Bush was an abysmal president, and bringing up vice presidents with regards to that is more than a little absurd - Bush’s VP was Dick “Literally Emperor Palpatine” Cheney. Extreme ultra-liberal policies? You mean policies that put him on the conservative side of Jimmy Carter?
It’s a very minor tragedy of history that we will never be able to refute these counterfactuals. Hey, maybe Kerry would have been a massive clusterfuck, among the worst presidents ever. Maybe he would have utterly botched Iraq (you know, even more than Bush did). Maybe Clinton would somehow be worse than I’m sorry I can’t finish this sentence with a straight face. But you don’t even try to make the claim plausible. Bush was pretty terrible. While historians have mildened somewhat (now he’s no longer in the bottom 10), that’s still pretty bad. The only way any historian will talk about him favorably is in comparison to Trump. By comparison, Obama is just shy of the top 10; make of that what you will.
Yeppers. I don’t miss Dubya at all, because he was really a lousy President in a bunch of different ways. It took the comparison to Trump to make him look even half-decent.
You know who I miss? I miss Barack Obama.
These two sentences back to back are hilarious!
Better than Cheney, who had no problem with the torture of innocents (and stated so) and got thousands of Americans killed for nothing.
If Kerry had been elected, we would have gotten out of Iraq sooner, thus preventing hundreds or even thousands of Americans from dying who ended dying for nothing.
All your pathetic moralizing is nothing compared to actually trying to keep Americans from dying for nothing. Let me guess – you didn’t serve in the military, did you?
Yeah, in his personal life, John Edwards was a real stinker. Almost as bad as President Pussygrabber, amirite?
That would have disgraced the office of the Vice-Presidency for…well, for a little while, anyway, until he resigned and was replaced, and became another footnote to history.
And who knows what horrible things Kerry might have done as President! Why, he might’ve even put competent people in charge of Homeland Security and FEMA!
Seriously, feel free to give examples of Kerry’s “extreme, ultra-liberal policies” that would have been so disastrous.