• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Clinton better than Bush?

zakur

Illuminator
Z
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
3,264
Poll: Clinton outperformed Bush

In a new poll comparing President Bush's job performance with that of his predecessor, a strong majority of respondents said President Clinton outperformed Bush on a host of issues.

[...]

Respondents favored Clinton by greater than 2-to-1 margins when asked who did a better job at handling the economy (63 percent Clinton, 26 percent Bush) and solving the problems of ordinary Americans (62 percent Clinton, 25 percent Bush).

On foreign affairs, the margin was 56 percent to 32 percent in Clinton's favor; on taxes, it was 51 percent to 35 percent for Clinton; and on handling natural disasters, it was 51 percent to 30 percent, also favoring Clinton.

Moreover, 59 percent said Bush has done more to divide the country, while only 27 percent said Clinton had.

When asked which man was more honest as president, poll respondents were more evenly divided, with the numbers -- 46 percent Clinton to 41 percent Bush -- falling within the poll's margin of error.
Click to expand...
Wow! People think the guy who was impeached for perjury is more honest than Bush. :D
 
I didn't think Clinton did anydamnthing. Except get a BJ. And lie about his sex life (like everybody else). Lessee, he bombed some camels.... Sent the Marines to Mogadishu for a couple weeks... We wouldn't let him and Wifey wreck the health care system.... Restrained the CIA, just enough to cause his successor grief....sold pardons... Did he do anything pro-active? About anything? My recollection is that he did less than Jimmy Carter? While Bush has certainly done stuff of lasting import- only time will tell whether the outcome will be good or bad. But the potential of bringing Democracy to the middle east is emmence, especially as they run out of oil and need a real economy in the region.
 
Hang 'em both. They have both so badly screwed up when it comes to terrorism and fighting it, (Clinton from neglect, Bush from being hamfisted), that I wouldn't trust either of 'em.
 
casebro said:
I didn't think Clinton did anydamnthing. Except get a BJ. And lie about his sex life (like everybody else). Lessee, he bombed some camels.... Sent the Marines to Mogadishu for a couple weeks... We wouldn't let him and Wifey wreck the health care system.... Restrained the CIA, just enough to cause his successor grief....sold pardons... Did he do anything pro-active? About anything? My recollection is that he did less than Jimmy Carter? While Bush has certainly done stuff of lasting import- only time will tell whether the outcome will be good or bad. But the potential of bringing Democracy to the middle east is emmence, especially as they run out of oil and need a real economy in the region.
Click to expand...
You can find any number of websites pointing to Clinton's accomplishments. Of course, many of these sites are a lot of propaganda along with a few facts. Much of what Clinton accomplished was mostly due to the favorable economic winds that prevailed for much of his term, though to his credit, he did not go out and spend all of the surplus that landed in his lap or plunge us into deficits because "we'll pay for it in the future". Frankly, I have a lot of problems with Clinton for some of his actions, like the reforming of welfare which is still driving our increasing gap between rich and poor. He also closed his eyes to a whole lot of environmental problems in order to keep big business placated.

Really, one reason the Republicans feared him so much was that he was stealing their agenda. He cut taxes and eliminated the deficit. He was too much like them.

But he also had a good rapport with the poor and the minorities in the country who voted for him overwhelmingly. Some have even called him "the first black president", certainly a title that was undeserved because he payed only a little more than lip service to civil rights.

What I respect him most for is the way he represented us in the foreign policy arena. He was friends with almost everybody. They even called him in to broker a peace treaty with the IRA which has all but eliminated violence in Northern Ireland. Europeans regarded him as urbane and intelligent and, most of all, he listened to them. In this realm, the contrast between him and Bush could not be more striking.

Clinton was a good president who presided in mostly good times. He cannot ever be called a great president because greatness requires some major crisis to be dealt with. But I can easily understand why people are now looking back fondly on the Clinton years. In comparison to the current situation, perjury about his sex life doesn't seem so important.
 
zakur said:
Poll: Clinton outperformed Bush

Wow! People think the guy who was impeached for perjury is more honest than Bush. :D
Click to expand...
Why should this be surprising? Clinton's low poll numbers were in his first term. During the Lewinsky/impeachment days, he had consistently high numbers, high 50's and 60's.

Every time you hear ignorant newscasters and pundits say something like, "Bush's numbers are approaching Clinton's numbers during impeachment," you should scream at the TV like I do.
 
casebro said:
I didn't think Clinton did anydamnthing. Except get a BJ. And lie about his sex life (like everybody else). Lessee, he bombed some camels.... Sent the Marines to Mogadishu for a couple weeks... We wouldn't let him and Wifey wreck the health care system.... Restrained the CIA, just enough to cause his successor grief....sold pardons... Did he do anything pro-active? About anything? My recollection is that he did less than Jimmy Carter? While Bush has certainly done stuff of lasting import- only time will tell whether the outcome will be good or bad. But the potential of bringing Democracy to the middle east is emmence, especially as they run out of oil and need a real economy in the region.
Click to expand...
He also set the cause of GLBT rights in the US back farther, and cause more damage, than Bush and Co have done so far; thanks to The Defense of Marriage Act, and the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.
 
My opinion, after only glancing at this thread, is that, as a president...

Clinton was pretty good. His legacy will be stained by the Monica affair but also his fault. He made some really bad mistakes in terms to the war on terror but in his defense, that is only visible with hindsight.

Bush's legacy is undetermined. Fact is, his legacy is based on the eventual outcome of democracy in the whole of the middle east. Very risky, given their past and their culture. It may go down as the legacy of...I forget his name but he pretty much secured much of the west from Mexico... ... ... see how that goes? Imagine a nation without him. [[[eta: POLK!!!!]]]

I hope it turns out in his legacy favor (for the obvious self-interest reasons).

I'd say, "we'll see" but odds are, we won't live to see it.
 
Last edited:
Let me see if I get this right;

Clinton - See Lisa, as long as you complain enough, you and everybody will get what they want.

Marge - That's a pretty lousy message.

Clinton - Well, I'm a lousy president.

< speaks for itself >
 
Dag gone right Clinton is better than both of the Bush Presidents combined!

Clinton would not have made war with Iraq unless there was plenty of support and help available.
Bush on the other hand, had very poor planning of the Iraq War combined with incredible optimism regarding the success of the war, and now all of us will be paying for his lack of planning for years and years to come (while Bush will be spending his retirement as an ex-president trying to catch even a fish bigger than the 7.5 pound one he got a couple of weeks ago).

Clinton would have done much more to help with Katrina. Heck, I expect that Clinton would have been so focused on the hurricane relief that he would have not even slept for the first 24 to 48 hours of the crisis.
Bush on the other hand, stayed on vacation and did not even bother to ask for international aid.

Clinton would have not done all of the domestic spying that has been going on.
Bush on the other hand has done everything he can to do all the domestic spying he can.

And so on and so forth.
 
So Clinton got an illicit BJ! May one ask what Jack Kennedy and Marylin Monroe got up to at her place at night? Pinochle, perhaps?? Some of the most respected and revered US presidents, AND some ranked the worst, from all sides of politics, have also been incorrigible womanisers and occasionally drug-addicts and drunks. And some have been as dull and uninteresting as an old wet newspaper. So perhaps we should leave that aspect out of the evaluation of Clinton vs Shrub, or anyone else for that matter.

Otherwise I would tend to reflect Tricky's evaluation, with emphasis on the difference in handling of foreign relations. Clinton seemed to at least appreciate other countries and their place in the world, even if US foreign policy was not going to favour them. Whereas Bush seems to want to know nothing about outside the USA, and lets this ignorance create fear which is what drives his policies. He's the classic fundie mentality.

Perhaps in summary, I would say that Clinton is neither stupid nor ignorant. Bush is not stupid either, but he IS utterly ignorant. Neither will be rated "great" presidents, but Clinton is in a league above Bush Jnr. Interestingly, I would also rate Bush Snr at about Clinton's performance level.
 
luchog said:
He also set the cause of GLBT rights in the US back farther, and cause more damage, than Bush and Co have done so far; thanks to The Defense of Marriage Act, and the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. Republicans are talking about constitutional amendments to prevent gay marriage. You think this is better than Clinton's era? Don't Ask Don't Tell was an improvement on the previous standard, and the best that could be had at the time. The Defense of Marraige Act was... is... an embarrassment. No other way to put it. Utter shame.
 
I think the basis of comparison is wrong.

I think it should be Harding better than Bush?

Grant better than Bush?

Filmore better than Bush?

Carter better than Bush?

Buchanan better than Bush?
 
Let's see... peace & prosperity vs. war & bankruptcy...

A Rhodes Scholar vs. a dunce...

A lie about sex vs. lies about everything...
 
Crossbow said:
Dag gone right Clinton is better than both of the Bush Presidents combined!

Clinton would not have made war with Iraq unless there was plenty of support and help available.
Click to expand...

Clinton did make war with Iraq. It wasn't a full-blown invasion, but sitting on the sidelines, enforcing "no-fly zones" on pain of death, and lobbing occasional cruise missile attacks still amounts to "war" in my book.
 
These kind of threads always strike me as whacked. It's as if nobody thinks it possible to have voted for both Clinton and Bush.
 
Cleon said:
Clinton did make war with Iraq. It wasn't a full-blown invasion, but sitting on the sidelines, enforcing "no-fly zones" on pain of death, and lobbing occasional cruise missile attacks still amounts to "war" in my book.
Click to expand...
Wasn't that a U.N. designated no-fly zone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom