# Will Bush go down as one of the top five Presidents of the last 100 years? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 3, 2005, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143 "2005-02-03T07:39:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/121 "2005-02-22T02:16:54Z")
> [@Little Nemo](#): > > Actually, the big goals set by the Wilson administration were restoring peace in Mexico, keeping the United States out of World War I, guaranteeing the rights of neutral powers, negotiating a just peace with Germany, and founding an organization that would prevent future wars. And he had failed on all five before he had his stroke. Those were all goals of Wilson’s second term. In his first term, he promised to take on what he called “the triple wall of privilege” (banks, tariffs, and trusts). He signed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913 to spread out the nation’s money supply so that more people had access to borrowing. He signed the Underwood Tariff Act in 1913 that lowered tariffs. He also supported the Sixteenth Amendment, which created the income tax to replace the tariff as the nation’s primary source of revenue. Finally, he signed both the Clayton Act and the FTC Act in 1914 to further reduce the power of the great trusts. Seems like he went 3 for 3 in his first term. ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/122 "2005-02-22T22:35:21Z")
Wow, a thread makes threadspotting AFTER its OP is banned. Cool. ---
**Author:** ![Bomzaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e480ec/32.png) [@Bomzaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bomzaway)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2005, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/123 "2005-02-22T22:50:42Z")
> [@Legolamb](#): > > I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again. Those of you who think Johnson was a bad president purely because of Vietnam need to take a trip to the LBJ Library in Austin and see the long wall of social and civil rights policies he introduced. There are hundreds of them, without which life would be a lot tougher for a lot of Americans. It’s a real eye-opener. IIRC, didn’t Johnson also decline a second term because he felt his being in office was a polarizing factor in the Vietnam war, thus exasperating the situation and making it more difficult for the US to find an end to the conflict? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2005, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/124 "2005-02-23T01:32:30Z")
> [@Bomzaway](#): > > IIRC, didn’t Johnson also decline a second term because he felt his being in office was a polarizing factor in the Vietnam war, thus exasperating the situation and making it more difficult for the US to find an end to the conflict? No, he withdrew because he knew he was toast. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2005, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/125 "2005-02-23T01:50:40Z")
> [@](#): > > Four marines were tragically killed after the election. By my count, about five-dozen Iraqis and coalition troops were killed on Election Day – is that the definition of “Catastrophic Success?” So the election shouldn’t of gone ahead because _soldiers_ were possibly going to be killed defending them? Yes, I do count millions of people voting for their government, a catastrophic success. > [@](#): > > But is that a good day in Iraq? Yes. > [@](#): > > Hundreds of our young people and thousands of Iraqis have been needlessly and senselessly murdered since George Bush triumphantly announced an end to “major combat” almost 2 years ago now. Ilike the way this sentence is constructed, the words ‘murdered’ and ‘George Bush’ within distance of each other, anyway all I have to say to this is Halabja and rape camps in Kuwait City, next! > [@](#): > > All of the above events have been heralded by this administration as “turning points” in the “war on terror” – or as wonderful events in the “march of democracy.” Desperation by insurgents is always proceeded with rising violence, but still, this person says democracy comes at too high a price? So they should revert back to the tyranny which they seemingly enjoyed? > [@](#): > > Really? I don’t think, judging by very recent history, that the elections will stop the bloodshed and destruction. Jesus H Christ, where did it say the elections would stop any violence, even US commanders have been saying this. > **[Newsmax.com - Breaking news from around the globe](https://www.newsmax.com)** > > Newsmax.com reports today’s news headlines, live news stream, news videos from Americans and global readers > seeking the latest in current events, politics, U.S., world news, health, finance, and more. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6878892/](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6878892/) ---
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2005, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/126 "2005-02-23T08:17:55Z")
In the same breath … Social security is bankrupt, I need another 80 billion for Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/127 "2005-02-26T15:36:54Z")
> [@Early Out](#): > > I once said that I thought Bush 43 was the worst President since McKinley. Subsequent events have caused me to realize that I was being unfair to McKinley. Both were whores for big business, and both led us into wars without even a shred of justification. > > McKinley comes out ahead, however, since he wasn’t the prime cheerleader for declaring war on Spain (which, like Iraq, posed absolutely zero threat to the U.S.). The press and the Congress were the drum-beaters, and he just went along for the ride. Bush and his inner circle, on the other hand, appear to be the primary war criminals in this era. Game, set, and match. Plus the fact that McKinley had the decency to be murdered by 1905 (the OP did mention the last 100 years) and had mostly stopped doing damage to the country by then. No, the list we’re dealing with is limited to Roosevelt I Taft Wilson Harding Coolidge Hoover Roosevelt II Truman Eisenhower Kennedy Johnson Nixon Ford Carter Reagan Bush I Clinton Bush II With a couple of notable exceptions, the phrase “bottom of the barrel” comes to mind. Bush might make the top five by default. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/128 "2005-02-26T18:38:35Z")
I remember having this same conversation when Reagan was president. Back then, the liberals hated him just as much as they hate Bush today. He was ‘Ronnie Raygun’, a senile old bastard who was going to start WWIII, crush the aspirations of the people’s movement in Nicaragua, rape the environment, throw the poor out into the streets, and in general was a monster who was out to destroy all. They were sure he was the worst president in history, and when I said that he was going to be remembered as one of the best presidents of the 20th century I was met with guffaws. Bush may or may not be remembered as a good president. That is going to depend entirely on how the Middle East turns out. If Iraq remains stable and relatively free, the Syrians get out of Lebanon and a democratic government comes to power, and the Iran/North Korea situations are resolved, Bush will be remembered well. If everything there goes to hell and we wind up with Iran II in Iraq, Bush will be remembered poorly. ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/129 "2005-02-26T19:29:55Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > I remember having this same conversation when Reagan was president. Back then, the liberals hated him just as much as they hate Bush today. He was ‘Ronnie Raygun’, a senile old bastard who was going to start WWIII, I know, I know! What were we thinking? Just because he said in 1981 “Yes, there could be a limited nuclear war in Europe” and jacked up the building of nukes. > [@Sam Stone](#): > > crush the aspirations of the people’s movement in Nicaragua, Yeah, I don’t know where we got that, just because he sent money to the former members of the National Guard of the dictator they had just overthrown, and was so determined to do so that he was willing to defy direct congressional decisions against it and further deplete his political capital raising the money by arms dealing with the very enemies he had won an election by speaking out against. > [@Sam Stone](#): > > rape the environment, Boy, is our face red on THAT one. Thank goodness he set us straight by pointing out that trees CAUSE pollution, rather than suffer from it. > [@Sam Stone](#): > > throw the poor out into the streets, Yeah, people act as though the homeless population rose exponentially, rather than merely doubling. > [@Sam Stone](#): > > and in general was a monster who was out to destroy all. They were sure he was the worst president in history, and when I said that he was going to be remembered as one of the best presidents of the 20th century I was met with guffaws. Only by those with a memory as short as his. And lemme get this straight… > [@Sam Stone](#): > > If Iraq remains stable and relatively free, and if > [@Sam Stone](#): > > the Syrians get out of Lebanon and a democratic government comes to power and if > [@Sam Stone](#): > > the Iran/North Korea situations are resolved, Bush will be remembered well. And he stands a chance…how, exactly? I swear, the only, repeat the ONLY fun thing about when the GOP takes power is that conservatives suddenly feel comfortable being very open with their most lunatic notions. The sheer entertainment value is almost worth it… ---
**Author:** ![Sunshine\_and\_Smiles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Sunshine\_and\_Smiles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunshine_and_Smiles)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2005, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/130 "2005-02-26T19:41:41Z")
But you know, Cap’n Crunch would make a _really_ good president… ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2005, 8:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/131 "2005-02-27T08:25:10Z")
> [@scotandrsn](#): > > I swear, the only, repeat the ONLY fun thing about when the GOP takes power is that conservatives suddenly feel comfortable being very open with their most lunatic notions. The sheer entertainment value is almost worth it… …until you realize that, even with their looney-tunes ideas, they’re actually allowed to vote instead of going to therapy to treat their myriad delusions. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Weird\_AL\_Einstein](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c67d28/32.png) [@Weird\_AL\_Einstein](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weird_AL_Einstein)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2005, 12:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/132 "2005-02-27T12:28:49Z")
Directly addressing the OP: Bush supporter that I am, up until recently I still wouldn’t have thought so. Since the Iraqi elections, though, I would say that the possibility is coming into view. But it’s much too soon to tell, he still has most of his second term ahead of him… ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2005, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143/133 "2005-02-28T06:29:57Z")
> [@](#): > > I remember having this same conversation when Reagan was president. Back then, the liberals hated him just as much as they hate Bush today. He was ‘Ronnie Raygun’, a senile old bastard who was going to start WWIII, crush the aspirations of the people’s movement in Nicaragua, rape the environment, throw the poor out into the streets, and in general was a monster who was out to destroy all. They were sure he was the worst president in history, and when I said that he was going to be remembered as one of the best presidents of the 20th century I was met with guffaws. Whereas nowadays we know it was Alzheimer’s disease and not senility. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-bush-go-down-as-one-of-the-top-five-presidents-of-the-last-100-years/288143.md?page=6)