The legacy of 'W'?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Reading this article got me wondering, when it's all said and done what do you think W's legacy will be? In 25 years when we look back, how do you think he will be perceived?

I mean c'mon, let's face it the guy came into office riding a mountain of controversy over the 2000 election, and he's enjoyin "rock-bottom poll numbers" as this article puts it.

I think the question is worth asking, is he the worst President we've seen to date?

Unpopular Bush risks little by staying course

To answer your question...I think the Dems are already too high on the idea that he's the worst president ever, it won't be until a good decade from now that we can truely assess his worth.
I personally think that 10 years from now a lot of people will be saying he was a good president but they let rumors and other people influence their decision.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by jsarno

To answer your question...I think the Dems are already too high on the idea that he's the worst president ever, it won't be until a good decade from now that we can truely assess his worth.
I personally think that 10 years from now a lot of people will be saying he was a good president but they let rumors and other people influence their decision.

How convenient for you to blame the Dems for Bush's legacy. Why is it that everything is always partisan? What about Bush's own colleagues breaking ranks and not supporting him on some very key issues? What about his own party suggesting that he's too insulated from reality and not willing to work with Congress?

I think the disadvantage that Bush has over, let's say Truman, is that Truman was not under the 24 hour scrutinty of the media, internet, and blogosphere to judge, critisize, and analyze his every move and non-move. And for that reason, I think it's an unfair comparison when I hear people guage Bush's ratings against that of Truman's.

I think Bush will need to push and get some meaningful policy approved before his term ends; Immigration comes to mind. But he may have exhausted all of his political currency in Washington.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I think Bush will need to push and get some meaningful policy approved before his term ends; Immigration comes to mind. But he may have exhausted all of his political currency in Washington.

Just an FYI, he has tried twice for immigration reform and was shot down. The president can only do so much cause that's how our system was made.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Just an FYI, he has tried twice for immigration reform and was shot down. The president can only do so much cause that's how our system was made.

Exactly. I think it was shot down, in part, because many didn't like the package, and secondly because Bush himself hasn't shown a capacity to compromise and reach accross the aisle on key issues. I think it just came back to bite him the ass, politically.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Exactly. I think it was shot down, in part, because many didn't like the package, and secondly because Bush himself hasn't shown a capacity to compromise and reach accross the isle on key issues. I think it just came back to bite him the ass, politically.

While I do agree...it think it has a lot to do with the fact that it has become PC to dislike Bush. Someone has to be "to blame" for this war in Iraq, and even though it was agreed with overwhelming support, those old fogies don't want to point their finger at themselves, so Bush is the one everyone is pointing to. It happens even here. Fact is, he said it would be a long hard fight, and he would see it through...well he actually was honest about it and we don't like that for some reason.

[jsarno]

Just an FYI for everyone...no president ever did everything 100% correctly. For those that loved Clinton, there were those that thought he was the worst president ever. To me, Clinton ended his presidency on a very high note, and now almost 8 years later, his tenure has been tarnished with comments of what he didn't do as a president and what he ignored that created other issues and problems.
Same goes for all presidents in the modern era of media. I think the only president in that history to be considered nearly perfect was Kennedy and only because people feel bad for picking on a president that was assissinated.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Just an FYI for everyone...no president ever did everything 100% correctly. For those that loved Clinton, there were those that thought he was the worst president ever. To me, Clinton ended his presidency on a very high note, and now almost 8 years later, his tenure has been tarnished with comments of what he didn't do as a president and what he ignored that created other issues and problems.
Same goes for all presidents in the modern era of media. I think the only president in that history to be considered nearly perfect was Kennedy and only because people feel bad for picking on a president that was assissinated.

Good points. You'll rarely, if ever, hear the media say anything negative about Kennedy. But off the record, and I've heard this from some old timers, they didn't care for him as much as some would lead you to believe.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Same goes for all presidents in the modern era of media. I think the only president in that history to be considered nearly perfect was Kennedy and only because people feel bad for picking on a president that was assassinated.

On the flip side, you've got someone like FDR who had the benefit of no term-limit to see his policies through. What if some two-term Presidents that followed FDR such as Ike, Reagan, and Clinton had the opportunity to spend another 6 years in office? Who knows what they could have done?

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

On the flip side, you've got someone like FDR who had the benefit of no term-limit to see his policies through. What if some two-term Presidents that followed FDR such as Ike, Reagan, and Clinton had the opportunity to spend another 6 years in office? Who knows what they could have done?

well, there is no way of knowing. I feel that Reagan's legacy would have been tarnished cause the economy had no real structure to it...the booming 80's were bound to crash and daddy bush took the blame. Ike, I'm not so sure...we could have benefited from another term of his I would imagine. Clinton most certainly would not get this high praise cause 9/11 would have happened under his tenure then all the information about him helping terrorism and ignoring intelligence about terrorism would have surfaced and killed any positive notions about him.
But you're right...who knows. Anything could have happened.