Hillarysworld

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Hillarysworld -> We Told You So The Kool Aid Recovery Forum -> Obama era makes Clinton, Bush look better (SF Examiner 7/23/10)
Post Info
TOPIC: Obama era makes Clinton, Bush look better (SF Examiner 7/23/10)
Jen the Michigander


SuperModerator

Status: Offline
Posts: 1788
Date:
Obama era makes Clinton, Bush look better (SF Examiner 7/23/10)
Permalink  
 

http://www.sfexaminer.com/politics/white-house/Obama-era-makes-Clinton_-Bush-look-better-1002852-99059759.html

Through the sentimental gauze of hindsight, Americans are re-evaluating a couple of recent exes.

A new poll from Gallup finds former President Clinton enjoying a 61 percent favorable rating -- well ahead of President Obama's 52 percent.

Former President George W. Bush has a 45 percent favorability rating -- but that's 10 percentage points higher than last year.

We have a saying here in Michigan: "At least I had a job when Bush was President."

Several factors play into the new dynamic, notably the economy. People felt richer during the Clinton administration -- their 401(k)s were fat, the tech boom was on, the federal government had a budget surplus.

"Obama has all these bad things associated with him, there's an immediacy to it," Edwards said. "With Clinton, we can look back and say times were good, and we forget about the other irritations."

Gallup pollsters noted this is the first time Clinton's favorable ratings exceed Obama's. In August 2008, Clinton was rated favorably by 52 percent.

The pollsters also noted, but did not directly attribute Clinton's improving image to, his wife Hillary Clinton's role as secretary of state. A separate poll found Hillary Clinton's favorability equal to her husband's, at 61 percent.

The widely perceived success of Bush's Iraq troop surge also could be helping shape a reconsideration of his presidency, particularly since Obama chose to continue the policy in his own presidency.

"It's not as if Bush's own party has spent the last two years coming to his defense," Hess said. "Quite the opposite."

Partisan considerations factor more into Obama and Bush favorability than Clinton's. Clinton was rated favorably by 30 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of independents -- plus 89 percent of Democrats.

Obama's numbers were slightly more polarized, with 17 percent of Republicans, 50 percent of independents and 86 percent of Democrats rating him favorably.

Those numbers were similar to those of Bush, who was rated favorably by 85 percent of Republicans, 37 percent of independents and 22 percent of Democrats.

"The numbers bear out -- under Clinton we had peace and prosperity, under Bush we had war and recession," Edwards said. "Under Obama, we are struggling."

__________________

4145952823_2e0edce16f.jpg

Nobody puts THIS baby in the corner!
freespirit


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 1695
Date:
Permalink  
 

Clinton was able to enact policies that improved life for all of us in many ways, and he did so while his every word and action were scrutinized by Ken Star, and while a number of Pubs made it their business to slam him daily in the press.

Bush made too many mistakes to mention, IMO.

But, the one quality Bush and Clinton had in common was their devotion to this country. Obviously, their approaches to government were vastly different, with Bill's being the far better way in my opinion, but, each wanted the best for this country and her citizens. Obama has not done one thing that evidences his patriotism or love of country. Obviously, the reason for that is clear.

Little wonder that Obama's ratings are lower than Bill's, and that Bush's are improving. If Obama can make even Bush looks good, he is in serious trouble.

__________________
It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.... Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less.  ~Susan B. Anthony
Sanders


Diamond

Status: Offline
Posts: 4567
Date:
Permalink  
 

yes, freespirit, i agree Bush made too many mistakes.

Yet, lately we are seeing a lot of Bush-reminiscents.

I just read this article and it really rang true.

Read @ NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist

Addicted to Bush

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: July 22, 2010
For a couple of years, it was the love that dared not speak his name. In 2008, Republican candidates hardly ever mentioned the president still sitting in the White House. After the election, the G.O.P. did its best to shout down all talk about how we got into the mess we’re in, insisting that we needed to look forward, not back. And many in the news media played along, acting as if it was somehow uncouth for Democrats even to mention the Bush era and its legacy.

The truth, however, is that the only problem Republicans ever had with George W. Bush was his low approval rating. They always loved his policies and his governing style — and they want them back. In recent weeks, G.O.P. leaders have come out for a complete return to the Bush agenda, including tax breaks for the rich and financial deregulation. They’ve even resurrected the plan to cut future Social Security benefits.

But they have a problem: how can they embrace President Bush’s policies, given his record? After all, Mr. Bush’s two signature initiatives were tax cuts and the invasion of Iraq; both, in the eyes of the public, were abject failures. Tax cuts never yielded the promised prosperity, but along with other policies — especially the unfunded war in Iraq — they converted a budget surplus into a persistent deficit. Meanwhile, the W.M.D. we invaded Iraq to eliminate turned out not to exist, and by 2008 a majority of the public believed not just that the invasion was a mistake but that the Bush administration deliberately misled the nation into war. What’s a Republican to do?

[SNIP]

Again, Republicans aren’t trying to rescue George W. Bush’s reputation for sentimental reasons; they’re trying to clear the way for a return to Bush policies. And this carries a message for anyone hoping that the next time Republicans are in power, they’ll behave differently. If you believe that they’ve learned something — say, about fiscal prudence or the importance of effective regulation — you’re kidding yourself. You might as well face it: they’re addicted to Bush.

Full article at NYTimes.com

========================

If that is all the policies that they offer... and if a Repub means going back to becoming a fact-fudging, war-mongering nation that gives big tax breaks to the rich at the cost of runnining up deficits despite raging wars... Is that what we want?

Gosh, I so so hope Hillary Clinton runs for 2012.  Any alternative is so hard to imagine.  Nothing else is workable, really!

__________________
Democracy needs defending - SOS Hillary Clinton, Sept 8, 2010
Democracy is more than just elections - SOS Hillary Clinton, Oct 28, 2010

Madam Secretary Blog at ForeignPolicy.com
Project Vote Smart - Stay informed and engaged!
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
Hillarysworld -> We Told You So The Kool Aid Recovery Forum -> Obama era makes Clinton, Bush look better (SF Examiner 7/23/10)
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard