Has there ever been so much hate for a president?
I can't remember in my lifetime, nor do any in history stand out in my mind.

Anyone?

Nope. The professional hate started with Clinton. When Bush won a close race in 2000 There is a core group of Dems that thing Bush stold the election. I think this will soon become common place amoung parties now. They each demonize the other side, say and do anything to undermine President's power. Republican impeach Clinton, Dems try to demonize Bush.

Tit for tat.

If Kerry wins, he will see the same things.

Mike, Clinton's presidency started the disrespect for the office. The ignorant attempts to toss him out be impeachment only brought shame and dishonor to the entire system.

What Chris is talking about, I think, is the pure hatred of everything Bush. Not since Nixon has there been such as clear line between "love and hate" for a President. It seems to be that with most presidents, people seem to have this "mixed to bad" or "mixed to good" feeling, pretty middle of the road, not liking some things, liking others. Bush just seems to totally polarize people.

Outside of the US, Bush is one of the most hated men in the world, I am sure. In a poll of 500 teenagers in Canada (age 14 to 18), a large number refered to the US as the "evil empire".

The american people might not like to hear it, but your standing in the world went from "superpower with control" to "agressive bully" in the last 3 years. Yeah, I know, 9/11 justifies almost anything. Whatever. Your still being seen as a bully nation, and Bush is being seen as the hated "king of the bullies". You know that one day, someone will try to topple the bully. The more the bully huffs and puffs, the more people want to push him down.

Bush is hated, brought it on himself, and has done nothing but piss people off for the last 3 years. It's not a good thing in the long run.

Alex

Uhhh ... kids ... ya ever heard of Nixon?

I liked Ike & I thought Nixon was definiately the most qualified of the candidates of that election. He was probably the most used vice president I can remember. He actually had a substantial role in foreign affairs. He was winning by a landslide - it was just stupid he misuded his powers.... stupid... stupid.... stupid.

Not sure which election you mean ... in 60, he may very well have been the most qualified candiate on paper. Bay of Pigs would have still been a clusterfuck, as probably would Vietnam; just not sure he would have been the right hand at the helm during the Cuban Missle Crisis, and I suspect he would have slowed down the course of civil rights, leading to more domestic conflict.

By 68 ... not sure it would have made much difference between Nixon and Humphrey, at least for Americans. The absence of Kissenger would have made things vastly different for a lot of Chileans, Timorese, etc.

In 72, the Democrats were taken captive the same way the Republicans had in '64. It was no race.

He was hated every bit as much as Bush or Clinton; and in spite of his demons and his criminal activity he did a tremendous amount of good. He was a far better president than Carter, Reagan, Bush I & II, and probably even Clinton.

BTW ... Ike is probably the most underrated President of the 20th Century.

I don't see what good Bush is doing at all.
Tricky Dick was corrupt, that's a given but like you said, he went to work each day and got shit done. I'm not so sure he was hated as much as the current appointed president.

Also, Nixon at least resigned over his shortcomings.

I don't see what good Bush is doing at all.
Tricky Dick was corrupt, that's a given but like you said, he went to work each day and got shit done. I'm not so sure he was hated as much as the current appointed president.

Also, Nixon at least resigned over his shortcomings. [/b][/quote]
Nixon , the only thing that stood in the way of greatness for him , was getting caught.

;-))

Ike was probably one of the most loved of the Presidents. It was not that he was the smartest guy around, but he surrounded himself with very good people. Especially in areas where he had to rely on more knowledgable people.

I wish the candidates had to give out a list of their potential cabnet appointees - then you could really see how they might stack up. No one man knows it all.............. so the advise he gets from his "experts" makes a huge difference.

Nixon , the only thing that stood in the way of greatness for him , was getting caught.

;-)) [/b][/quote]


Very true!

I won't argue with that a whole lot ...

of course, he wouldn't stand a chance in today's Republican party. EPA? OSHA? normalizing relations with China?

yeah, right.

In the US, quite a few have been "hated" more.

PD's favorite Truman, for example, was reviled as he left office and yet is looked upon favorably today. Andrew Johnson and Harding would certainly qualify as "more hated". You might say Lincoln was more hated. His approval in the South was certainly low. ;-)

Half the US would vote for Bush today. Pretty average there.

History may judge Bush as anywhere between extremely bad and extremely good depending on what happens in the Middle East in the next few decades. If Iraq begins the movement to Democracy in the Middle East, Bush will be see as a visionary. If the Middle East slides away he will be seen as a buffoon. I wouldn't bet either way on that.

I would bet buffoon.

I think he has helped the cause of Islamic extremists.

They can now literally point and say " Look , look at what the vAmericans have done there"

He did not act correctly.

He acted without the support of the UN.

and on a totally unfounded precept of possesions of WMDs

Well, hell. Andrew Jackson attempted genocide, Truman dropped nukes on two cities, FDR rounded up Japs and Germans and put them in camps and Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus. Yet all are quite revered today. I won't bet on the strange path of history.

Well, hell. Andrew Jackson attempted genocide, Truman dropped nukes on two cities, FDR rounded up Japs and Germans and put them in camps and Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus. Yet all are quite revered today. I won't bet on the strange path of history. [/b][/quote]
yeah thats cause it turned out good in the end. ;-)))

In 100 years when Nickatilynx VI starts the Official "Sabaah al-khayr Oprano" thread , it might be different.


;-)))

yeah thats cause it turned out good in the end. ;-)))

In 100 years when Nickatilynx VI starts the Official "Sabaah al-khayr Oprano" thread , it might be different.


;-))) [/b][/quote]
That's what I'm saying. Take Truman, for example. When he left office he was seen as having lost China to the Communists and as fighting an unpopular war in Korea. That war cost more than 44,000 American lives. Truman's approval when he left office was less than half of what Bush's is. 23% for Truman vs. 49% for Bush. Today Truman places well in nearly every poll of "best presidents".

What will happen in the Middle East? I have no idea. What kind of a world is it where a guy can have 23% approval when he leaves office and be extremely popular a half century later? The answer is one that changes more than our ability to predict.

yeah thats cause it turned out good in the end. ;-)))

In 100 years when Nickatilynx VI starts the Official "Sabaah al-khayr Oprano" thread , it might be different.


;-))) [/b][/quote]
:ph34r: bwaahaahaa ... when the revolution comes, you will be beaten soundly with a trout 3x a day, and forced to read spam emails in your free time :ph34r: