My own recollections have limited value, but I admit answers here surprise me. Although I thought the 2000 election was “stolen” I did not blame Bush for that, and gave him the benefit of the doubt on his policies from the beginning. After the attack on WTC, America largely rallied around him. The idea that he was initially hated as much as Obama flabbergasts me. I certainly agree that there was much antipathy against him after some huge blunders, especially his Iraq adventure. Obviously some will disagree that these were huge blunders, but to pretend that any alleged mistakes by Obama deserve a comparable level of antipathy shows a very peculiar perspective.
I think statistics like Frankenstein Monster’s might be a way to address OP’s question objectively. On a single page, Fox News’ opinion index, right now I see
Do conservatives think liberal opinion indexes 8 or 10 years ago would show a similar anti-Bush bias?
I think Bush came off as a decent, likeable fellow for the most part. Including to me. I think that is why he won two elections. It is also what confused people and helped him divide his opposition.
By creating an image of a stupid, bumbling man causing extraordinary harm without any ill will, Bush stymied those who (probably more accurately) saw him as carrying out a deliberate, carefully destructive plan.
So, I guess I’d say the problem is that people didn’t hate Bush when they should have. They hated what he did, but he was able to hide behind the image of innocent stupidity.
Nobody ever thought he was a supergenius bent on world domination – but, neither was he “The Decider” – we all knew, and still know, that Darth Cheney was pulling the strings. (According to Ron Suskind, the CIA’s codename for Cheney was “Edgar” – as in, Edgar Bergen.)
You don’t know what you’re talking about. Obama released his BC in 2008 before the election.
The “long form” thing was a bunch of dipshits asking for the archival version the government has that no one generally gets. You don’t just order one. What Obama initially provided was exactly what everyone else in the country has.
Bush got a lot of hate. But as far as I can tell, most if it was justified. He was a terrible president. And he squandered the good will the world had for us after 911.
I don’t think Bush was evil, just a middling talent that got browbeaten by Cheney and the neocons. The problems people had with Bush were due to his actions. No one had to make up shit to be angry at Bush for.
Contrast that to Obama, the people who hate him, hate him for nonsense they make up.
This may be. Anecdotally, I present myself. I actually agree with W on some things and sympathize with him on others, but thought he was promoted to the level of his incompetence as Prez, and grew to despise the party that mistook him for qualified.
Also, he cut taxes while prosecuting two foreign wars. Total economic mismanagement.
So I voted against his reelection in 2004, and was glad to see the back of him in 2008. I spent the four years between getting very angry and very radicalized.
But I also consider Obama a disappointment. Rule of law isn’t just a partisan talking point for me. I just tend to take “Obama’s” side because I hate the present GOP leadership more.
So that’s the underlying thing.
Bush was a center-right mediocrity who was fiscally reckless, environmentally irresponsible, warmongering himself, broke the law for the Global War On Terror–and co-partisan to people even more despicable than he was, like hardline Anglo racists.
Obama is not so fiscally reckless, insufficiently environmentally responsible to completely make up for the damage of the previous era, still warmongering, still broke the law for the GWOT, still kind of a Tory–but he’s not the co-partisan of DeLay, Cantor, and their type. He gets “lesser evil” cred.
But it seems like moderates often love Obama, and the far right often despise him. :shrug:
I consider Obama to be the best we could hope for. However ineffectual he may be at foiling the schemes of the plutacracy, I think he strives towards the goals that I would strive for if I were in his place.
To me, it’s clear that Obama is the more threatened president, at least when looking at threats emanating from within the US. I’m not sure if that equates exactly to hated, but surely they are close. As already cited, Obama reportedly receives more death threats than any US president, ever.
Obama appears to also be more threatened than Clinton, in terms of conspiracists aligned against him-- so-called patriot groups.
The article claims that the economy plays a major role in the expansion of pseudo patriots, but politics must as well. 1996 was a relatively good year, economically. The economy turned much worse in 2001-- nearly into recession, in terms of US per capita GDP– yet there was no expansion in “patriots”. On the contrary, the number of such groups declined in both 2001 and 2002.
Qin made a good point that could use some expansion. Suspicion and fear of Bush, particularly after a swell of sympathy and good will following the 9/11 attacks abated, was much worse outside the US than negative opinions I recall of Obama. Pew Research agrees with my observations-- see the section “Overall Ratings for U.S. Mostly Positive”. Global Opinion of Obama Slips, International Policies Faulted | Pew Research Center
So, by my lights, Bush was the more disliked of the two by far if international opinion is considered. However, in terms of attention from hate groups within the United States, Obama “gets more hatred”.
if we are talking about the present, then I think Bush is the more hated. Both left and right seem to have a disdain for him and his presidency. I mean, they didn’t even invite him to the Republican Party convention!
Clinton was everywhere for Obama! Bush? not so much…
They both get/got alot of hate. I think the difference is a lot of the hate towards Obama has little to do with things he’s done. They accuse him of not really being born in the US. They claim he’s a Muslim. They make the hate racial, saying he’s out only to help black Americans. They hate they have towards him started before he was ever even elected.
With the exception of the anger over the whole election stealing debacle, the liberals didn’t have any real issues with Bush until he started messing up. And the whole election anger thing was more directed at the SCOTUS not Bush himself.
The total obsession with hating Obama is what I think sets it apart. Those who HATE him seem obsessed with it. Their lives seem consumed by it, like Orly Tate. Bush had more than his fare share of people who didnt like him. And had tons and tons of jokes about him, but most of them weren’t so evil, so consumed by total hatred and obsession.
