You express your ideas very appropriately. About your question, you are right in many things: John Kerry won according to the popular vote, although the Electoral College chose GW Bush. It is a complex system which I, as many other people, criticize because it does not reflect the will of the people.
About the so-called "war on terror", I'm afraid it is all a lie. It is true Bush, Cheney and some more members of the present government own five of the companies in charge of the reconstruction of Iraq: among them Halliburton, Kellogg, Bechtel, and some other contractors. They were favored among many others, even more competitive companies, because Bush had personal interests in those companies. This fact was proved by the CPI (Center of Public Integrity) which declared it to the general public.
Not only that, but after all the inconsistencies showed in Iraq, like lying to the Americans about the WMD's (Weapons of Mass Destruction) supposedly found in Iraq, the UN demanded US not to invade Iraq because it would be a violation of many International treaties that US agreed to sign. What happen? Bush, Cheney and the former secretary of state, Powell, ignored those warnings and decided to go to Iraq. Then people ask why is United States so hated. Well it is because of that arrogant, preopotent and disrespectful behavior.
Finally, Bush's lack of mastery with numbers. At the end of Clinton's administration, United states reached the 0 "Cero" deficit record. It even reached a state of superavit. Something extremely hard to get. Nowadays, United States has a deficit of more than 300 BILLION dollars, and that hardcore expending is directly reflected in our pockets.
Is Bush a good president? Definitely NO.
2006-07-07 10:28:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by Juan Carlos R 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
In 2000 George W. Bush did not win the popular vote but in 2004 he did. I do like George W. Bush as President. George W. Bush can not individually start a war. That is not how the American Government works. In fact, the President of the United States of America can very seldom do anything or enact anything himself; there are checks and balances to prevent this.
As for the war, oil might have some part to do with it but that was not the main reason. I believe that there were multiple reasons why we went to war. There were lots of reasons and if for some reason the United States can secure the Middle East that would be a very beneficial thing for Democracy to have a stronghold in such a troubled governmental region. Whether this is right or not, or if you agree with Democracy is a whole other issue.
2006-07-07 17:26:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by solutionscenterben 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
While I completely disapprove of Bush for his handeling of 9/11, the wars, and the economy (I'm not even going to go into his social failures...) but then again, I wasn't old enough to vote in 2000, so I couldn't control it. However, I can tell you that the electoral system doesn't work the way you are trying to explain it as.
First there is the popular vote where citizens vote for a candidate, and then based on the popular vote, by region, electors vote as a representative of that region. Thats why some people win the popular vote and lose the electoral vote (Gore in 2000) they win areas with less electoral voters and then lose the 270 electoral votes needed to be proclaimed president.
Hope that helped explain so stuff
2006-07-07 17:21:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by I doubt it 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
The press conference that was on CSPAN today should clue people in to how much of a total retard this president is. He also, unfortunatlely is a complete liar.
Sure Kerry won, it is too late to care about that history.
I think both sides Right and Left and the moderates too, can see clearly that this guy is a 2 year old and only the dumbest Americans buy into a word of it anymore.
I feel bad that we have to deal with the wreckage of this idiot and his corporate puppet masters but we do. This country will be long in repariations from the damage of his terms.
It is an embarassment to have George W. Bush as your president.
Don't hold it against all of us, many never wnated anything like this clown... but it was imposed on the population.
2006-07-07 17:17:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There’s no doubt that George Bush will go down as one of the best presidents of all time. Surely in the top ten. He cut taxes, created a new entitlement, fought a war, developed and implemented programs to fight terrorists, helped a nation recover from a devastating sneak attack, attempted to revamp education and social security, lead an economic recovery, expended presidential power, held and increased his party’s hold on power, put a lot of judges on the bench, and much more.
Now, whether or not you consider these to be good or bad things, the fact is he’s left his mark. He’s steered the country, and history. These are the kinds of things historians look at. And in twenty years or so, Bush will move up high on the list of successful presidents in history’s reckoning.
By these same measures, Bill Clinton will drop like a stone. He didn’t really accomplish anything as president.
2006-07-07 17:32:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by Day of Acerbity 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I approve of most of Bush's actions but realize the man is not perfect. I did vote for him in both elections, 200 and 2004. We who voted did vot, but, yes, it is the electoral college who does the actual "electing." That's the way the Constitution is set up and will probably never be changed. I think Americans who disagree with the American system of selecting Presidents should either work to change it through the system -- the best system in the world, by far; shut up and live with it; or leave the country to reside and "vote" in another country. I believe ragging on our system but not making any actual effort to change it is not good for America. Please do NOT take this as a personal slam against you or any reader. It is my opinion as an American. a Voting american
2006-07-07 17:22:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by canary 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, I approve of George W. Bush, always have and always will and I voted for him in both 2000 and 2004 and I believe as a fact that if the Former President of the United States of America George Washington, Former Prime Minister of the Dominion of Canada Pierre Trudeau, and Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Winston Churchill were all alive today, all three men would be very pround of George W. Bush for be able to stand up against his critics and have courage and conviction for what he believes in.
2006-07-08 11:51:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mr. Knowledgeable VI 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think our president is doing a great job. If you look back in history I don't belive any other president has had the crisis to overcome in such a short tenure. I mean, first the space shuttle, the 911, the war overseas. And after the smoak clears look at the things our country has accomplished. Now you see, most of the people that don't like bush WILL NEVER like bush. Its that simple NOT because of who he is BUT the party's he's afficlated with. Sometimes Democrate's need to look at the whole picture instead of careing around chip on their shoulders because they got beat in an election.
2006-07-07 17:54:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by HwyManSc 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Welp, the President should have gotten the United Nations to support the war in Iraq, he should have listened more to Colin Powell and not gone into Baghdad and the Suni Triangle, he should have just sanctioned Iraq and bombed them. Bush is sending the young off to die in another unpopular war which is only substantiated by the war on terror. But on the other hand we do have to fite our enemies or they will gain the upper-hand. All-in-all I wish Gore had won. We should see the Democrats get the White House next time I hope.
2006-07-07 17:16:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by John Luke 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush is quite possibly one of the worst presidents in history, in my opinion. I love to hear someone reveal the secrets of our "democracy"...Bush has blatantly walked all over the US and the rest of the World and continues to wear that smug smile...After all the pain an suffering HE HAS CAUSED he shouldn't ever smile. Maybe if he had a soul....
2006-07-07 17:19:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by sweetangl737 1
·
1⤊
0⤋