DVD Talk
Bush now considered less trustworthy than Clinton [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum

PDA

View Full Version : Bush now considered less trustworthy than Clinton


Lord Rick
11-14-05, 04:45 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/14/bush.poll/index.html

"When asked in the new poll if they trust Bush more than they had Clinton, 48 percent of respondents said they trusted Bush less, while 36 percent said they trusted him more and 15 percent said they trusted Bush the same as Clinton."

rotfl

Of course it's a good thing local elections are about local politics:

"In the poll, 56 percent of registered voters said they would be likely to vote against a local candidate supported by Bush, while 34 percent said the opposite.

Only 9 percent said their first choice in next year's elections would be a Republican who supports Bush on almost every major issue."

DVD Polizei
11-14-05, 04:52 PM
BREAKING DVD POLIZEI NEWS

Fox News Poll:

Support Bush: 100.06% of American Patriots

Lord Rick
11-14-05, 05:00 PM
BREAKING DVD POLIZEI NEWS

Fox News Poll:

Support Bush: 100.06% of American Patriots

That would be funny, except Bush is sucking in the Fox News polls, too.

darkessenz
11-14-05, 05:06 PM
Americans are being fooled by the liberal media into thinking Bush is doing badly.*









*snicker

kvrdave
11-14-05, 05:23 PM
Holy cow. I will admit that when you are seen as less trustworthy than Clinton, you have really done bad. It does surprise me that they would use Clinton as a comparison, though. Wasn't he the greatest (not to mention first Black) president ever? Why would anyone doubt his trustworthiness?

Bill Needle
11-14-05, 05:34 PM
Holy cow. I will admit that when you are seen as less trustworthy than Clinton, you have really done bad. It does surprise me that they would use Clinton as a comparison, though. Wasn't he the greatest (not to mention first Black) president ever? Why would anyone doubt his trustworthiness?
"Bush worse than Clinton"

Man bites dog I suppose.

Th0r S1mpson
11-14-05, 06:28 PM
:lol:

What a joke. I can't believe people.

CRM114
11-14-05, 06:37 PM
:lol:

What a joke. I can't believe people.

Wait. Aren't these the same "people" who you told us correctly re-elected George W. Bush?

:hscratch:

General Zod
11-14-05, 06:48 PM
Wow I guess this just shows where the best candidate the democrats could come up with ranks in the eyes of people..

Th0r S1mpson
11-14-05, 06:57 PM
Wait. Aren't these the same "people" who you told us correctly re-elected George W. Bush?
Yes. What are you talking about?

darkessenz
11-14-05, 07:27 PM
Holy cow. I will admit that when you are seen as less trustworthy than Clinton, you have really done bad. It does surprise me that they would use Clinton as a comparison, though. Wasn't he the greatest (not to mention first Black) president ever? Why would anyone doubt his trustworthiness?

The point is that people feverishly defend Bush, while denigrating Clinton to no end. Some people believe that Clinton was the worst president ever. Even if their worst predictions are true (which is highly doubtful) a lot of people thing that Bush has done even worse.

So lets say that Clinton was moderately good in some aspects, and notoriously bad in others. I think that Bush has been quite below average across the board, and worse in several major categories when compared with Clinton.

Something that is hard to understand is that Clinton led a scandalous 2nd term presidency, but he still managed to make a large majority of Americans feel good about the presidency and the president. The only exceptions, were of course, the most vocal Republicans.

Now the majority of Americans, except for the most vocal Republicans, think Bush is doing a shitty job.

sracer
11-14-05, 10:05 PM
The point is that people feverishly defend Bush, while denigrating Clinton to no end. Some people believe that Clinton was the worst president ever. Even if their worst predictions are true (which is highly doubtful) a lot of people thing that Bush has done even worse.

So lets say that Clinton was moderately good in some aspects, and notoriously bad in others. I think that Bush has been quite below average across the board, and worse in several major categories when compared with Clinton.
A fair assessment, IMO.

Something that is hard to understand is that Clinton led a scandalous 2nd term presidency, but he still managed to make a large majority of Americans feel good about the presidency and the president. The only exceptions, were of course, the most vocal Republicans.
Well, y'see... you went too far... got too greedy. There is NO WAY that Clinton's 2nd term made a majority of Americans feel good about the presidency.

Nutter
11-14-05, 10:29 PM
Well, y'see... you went too far... got too greedy. There is NO WAY that Clinton's 2nd term made a majority of Americans feel good about the presidency.

Are you crazy? Clinton proved that the american dream of attaining vast power and using it to get laid is alive and kicking. How many red-blooded men have had fantasies about what they'd do as a big cheese at a political convention thanks to Clinton? Clinton's only failing is his taste in women, not keeping a decent stock of vibrators in the oval office, and being dumb enough to lie about getting laid on the job. What he should have said is "Hell yah niggahz! I be diggin' the fat-bottomed girls on tha' job. It's stressful up here ya knowz! The only reason I haven't nuked some shizzle up is thanks to all these intern ho's!" Men would have laughed. Women would have snorted. Militant feminists would have had to replace all their shooting targets. Clinton would have still been branded a perv by the media, but at least an honest one. The only trick would have been getting his ice-queen wife to admit she was into the whole swinging scene.

Red Dog
11-14-05, 10:34 PM
Well, y'see... you went too far... got too greedy. There is NO WAY that Clinton's 2nd term made a majority of Americans feel good about the presidency.


I agree. If Monica is the best one could nail as President, how could one feel good about the presidency?

darkessenz
11-14-05, 10:52 PM
There is NO WAY that Clinton's 2nd term made a majority of Americans feel good about the presidency.

I guess I was thinking about his positive stats, despite the scandal. Maybe they didn't feel "good" about the presidency, but their satisfaction didn't tank.


I agree. If Monica is the best one could nail as President, how could one feel good about the presidency?

Its the only one that emerged on the news, something about the tip of an iceberg maybe? ;) Also, maybe the majority of Americans have pretty low standards:)

Lord Rick
11-15-05, 11:50 AM
Thank God Cheney and Bush restored honor and integrity to the White House.

:lol:

sherm42
11-15-05, 12:54 PM
I think most people probably just feel that getting a BJ in the oval office and lying about it didn't lead to the deaths of 2000 troops.

Numanoid
11-15-05, 01:34 PM
Wow I guess this just shows where the best candidate the democrats could come up with ranks in the eyes of people..
http://www.thisishertfordshire.co.uk/_images/db/14/92/arts_fest_web.149262.full.jpg

Shannon Nutt
11-15-05, 01:36 PM
Won't it be hilarious when Hillary Clinton runs on the campaign of "restoring integrity" to the White House?! :)

dick_grayson
11-15-05, 01:47 PM
Won't it be hilarious when Hillary Clinton runs on the campaign of "restoring integrity" to the White House?! :)

:lol: that would be an amusing slogan if each candidate used that regarding the previous President

DVD Polizei
11-15-05, 01:55 PM
That would be funny, except Bush is sucking in the Fox News polls, too.

:sad:

DVD Polizei
11-15-05, 01:56 PM
I think most people probably just feel that getting a BJ in the oval office and lying about it didn't lead to the deaths of 2000 troops.

But it led to the death of hundreds of millions of itty bitty sperm human being thingies. :mad:

sfsdfd
11-15-05, 01:57 PM
:lol: that would be an amusing slogan if each candidate used that regarding the previous President
"You know, when they forced Khruschev out, he sat down and wrote two letters to his successor. He said, 'When you get yourself into a situation you can't get out of, open the first letter, and you'll be safe. When you get yourself into another situation you can't get out of, open the second letter.'

"Soon enough, he gets into a tight situation, and he opens the first letter. It says - 'Blame it all on me.' So he blames it all on the old guy, and it worked like a charm.

"When he got himself into a second situation, he opened the second letter. It said - 'Sit down, and write two letters.'"

(apparently from Traffic, but it's such a great quote that it transcends its source)

- David Stein

General Zod
11-15-05, 02:06 PM
I think most people probably just feel that getting a BJ in the oval office and lying about it didn't lead to the deaths of 2000 troops.
I don't determine how trustworthy someone is by the results of their lie. I determine how trustworthy they are by determining if they knowingly DID lie to me. I know Clinton knowingly lied to me, I don't know that Bush knowingly lied to me. In my opinion there's a big difference between someone who will tell you a bold faced lie and someone who is telling you something they truly think is correct, which turns out not to be.

I now expect another red plate from Numanoid :)

DVD Polizei
11-15-05, 02:18 PM
GZ,

True, Bush may not have lied, as he is incapable of two-dimensional mental comprehension, but you can't deny his surrounding support staff, manipulating the intel by not asking the right questions, and just telling Bush, "Yeah, you're completely right Mr. B. Uhuh. Go get'em. We support yah. Nine One One. Resolve. You betcha Mr. B."

Sometimes I wonder if the intel was actually there which proved Saddam didn't have much WMD or much of a threat to anyone except himself. We could have simply bombed where he was, annihilating him, and put a force on the ground to kill most of his loyal guards. That could've been it as far as our physical presence there. But somewhere along the line, he changed his goals. Whether it was him, or his supporters who saw an opportunity for massive profits for their favorite businesses and oil companies, we'll know in the upcoming years. Unfortunately, how many thousands of US lives have to die before we figure this out?

JasonF
11-15-05, 03:48 PM
I don't determine how trustworthy someone is by the results of their lie. I determine how trustworthy they are by determining if they knowingly DID lie to me. I know Clinton knowingly lied to me, I don't know that Bush knowingly lied to me. In my opinion there's a big difference between someone who will tell you a bold faced lie and someone who is telling you something they truly think is correct, which turns out not to be.

I now expect another red plate from Numanoid :)

1) The phrase is "bald-faced lie," not "bold-faced lie."

2) I don't believe President Bush lied about Iraq and WMD. I do believe he conducted his investigation with blinders on, looking to obtain a particular result, downplaying facts that were contrary to the result he wanted and highlighting facts that supported the result he wanted. This is dangerous and undermines the point of conducting the investigation in the first place.

Th0r S1mpson
11-15-05, 04:07 PM
1) The phrase is "bald-faced lie," not "bold-faced lie."http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/archives/9403/techwhirl-9403-00154.html

uberjoe
11-15-05, 04:12 PM
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/archives/9403/techwhirl-9403-00154.html

That site is lying.

Morf
11-15-05, 04:24 PM
Bush now considered less trustworthy than Clinton

Just now? :scratch2:

General Zod
11-15-05, 04:37 PM
I don't believe President Bush lied about Iraq and WMD. I do believe he conducted his investigation with blinders on, looking to obtain a particular result, downplaying facts that were contrary to the result he wanted and highlighting facts that supported the result he wanted. This is dangerous and undermines the point of conducting the investigation in the first place.
I believe he took the evidence as presented and made a judgement call based on it. The evidence FOR wmd's was overwhelming, so he went with it. It's the same overwhelming evidence that convince John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, etc. Everything pointing to him having them. There's already been committees studying this stuff, mostly headed by democrats that have found over and over that Bush didn't do anything of the sort. Like this report released in March of this year (Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction) which stated "The Commission has found no evidence of "politicization" of the Intelligence Community's assessments concerning Iraq's reported WMD programs. No analytical judgments were changed in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion. The Commission has investigated this issue closely, querying in detail those analysts involved in formulating pre-war judgments about Iraq's WMD programs." Yes, this commision was headed by a democrat (Sen. Robb).

I mean you can keep saying Bush lied, Bush twisted the truth, blah blah blah but it doesn't mean it's true. We KNOW Clinton lied but we've got nothing to prove that Bush has intentionally lied to anyone - in fact all the comissions and investigations show exactly the opposite.

DVD Polizei
11-15-05, 04:39 PM
For JasonF:

Bold-Faced Lie

:D

JasonF
11-15-05, 05:33 PM
I don't believe President Bush lied
I mean you can keep saying Bush lied
:rolleyes: It's always so much fun to have a conversation around here.

darkessenz
11-15-05, 05:49 PM
believe he took the evidence as presented and made a judgement call based on it. The evidence FOR wmd's was overwhelming, so he went with it.

If it was so sure, then why was there and international search? Why did the US send Colin Powell to the UN to convince everyone who already knew about these weapons?

THIS POST SUCKED! :)

A worse situation was created. A giant power vacuum has opened in the most politically volatile area in the world, along with the region's 2nd most hated country leading the charge.

nemein
11-15-05, 06:44 PM
That is the reason why people were upset with the Bush aministration's decision to approve agressive military action.

AKA Bush had the balls to call them on their empty rhetoric and now people are upset. Gotcha...


A worse situation was created. A giant power vacuum has opened in the most politically volatile area in the world, along with the region's 2nd most hated country leading the charge.

I disagree, a power vacuum would be created if we left right now. A basic infrastructure is falling into place and while there are random attacks the insurgents don't seem to be organized around a governing system they are just looking to do damage. This is why the vast majority of people still aren't falling in line w/ them. I agree time is running out and people are becoming impatient (both here and there) but let's see how the next election goes first.

Doc Moonlight
11-15-05, 08:55 PM
I don't determine how trustworthy someone is by the results of their lie. I determine how trustworthy they are by determining if they knowingly DID lie to me. I know Clinton knowingly lied to me, I don't know that Bush knowingly lied to me. In my opinion there's a big difference between someone who will tell you a bold faced lie and someone who is telling you something they truly think is correct, which turns out not to be.

Well then, didn't GWB KNOWINGLY lie about his drunk driving conviction? Was he bald-faced/bold-faced lying or did he just think he wasn't arrested?

hahn
11-15-05, 09:11 PM
AKA Bush had the balls to call them on their empty rhetoric and now people are upset. Gotcha...
No. We're upset b/c he's a moron and he actually has power. :rolleyes: Having balls doesn't make him any less a moron.

Th0r S1mpson
11-16-05, 12:11 AM
No. We're upset b/c he's a moron and he actually has power. :rolleyes:
If only 62 million+ people didn't vote for him. Shoot.

Supermallet
11-16-05, 03:27 AM
Well, y'see... you went too far... got too greedy. There is NO WAY that Clinton's 2nd term made a majority of Americans feel good about the presidency.

Actually, as I recall, only the most ardent and conservative Clinton-haters objected. Most people really didn't care about the issue. It was seen, by most Americans, as unimportant. I remember reading some studies showing that if Al Gore had played up his relationship with Clinton more in 2000, he might have had enough solid votes to avoid the whole Florida problem and win the presidency uncontested. And why? Because, on the whole, people thought Clinton did a good job as president.

CRM114
11-16-05, 09:01 AM
Well then, didn't GWB KNOWINGLY lie about his drunk driving conviction? Was he bald-faced/bold-faced lying or did he just think he wasn't arrested?

Snap! The DUI comes out of the woodwork. Good job!

CRM114
11-16-05, 09:04 AM
If only 62 million+ people didn't vote for him. Shoot.

That doesn't say anything about the 60 million+ people that thought he was a moron. ;) I guess they were the ones who were wrong.

MisterQ
11-16-05, 01:54 PM
I remember reading some studies showing that if Al Gore had played up his relationship with Clinton more in 2000, he might have had enough solid votes to avoid the whole Florida problem and win the presidency uncontested.

Gee...I wonder why Gore distanced himself from Bubba...Hmm...*scratches head*...

Supermallet
11-16-05, 02:40 PM
I wonder, too, as it lost him the election!

bhk
11-16-05, 04:27 PM
Originally Posted by hahn
No. We're upset b/c he's a moron and he actually has power.
You mean the moron actually duped all those smart liberals in the congress?

bhk
11-16-05, 04:29 PM
If Al Gore actually won his home state he wouldn't have needed any cozying up to Slickster. Even that pathetic Mondale won his home state.

hahn
11-16-05, 05:47 PM
You mean the moron actually duped all those smart liberals in the congress?
Who? The Democrats who went along with him simply for political reasons? Who said I had any respect for them either?

It must be nice to always be able to console yourself with supporting this asshole by turning this into some game. "Check the scoreboard!" Meanwhile, actual important issues completely fall by the wayside. I guess that makes you more of a patriot somehow?

Th0r S1mpson
11-16-05, 06:00 PM
It must be nice to always be able to console yourself with supporting this asshole
I'm starting to think you don't have much respect for President Bush.

JasonF
11-16-05, 06:14 PM
If Al Gore actually won his home state he wouldn't have needed any cozying up to Slickster. Even that pathetic Mondale won his home state.

D.C. is not a state, but Gore did carry it. ;)

bhk
11-16-05, 08:14 PM
The Democrats who went along with him simply for political reasons? Who said I had any respect for them either?

The dems are saying they were duped by Bush and that's why they voted to authorize the war. Kind of sad/funny that a "moron" who says he's conservative and fool all those smart liberals.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0