CLINTON ALL THE WAY, man!!!!!!
Bush is a clueless jackass, oblivious to the needs of the average American working stiff, trying to eke out a meager existence. At least Clinton could RELATE to the common folk - he KNOWS what we are up against in the "real world"! In fact, he's just a helluva lot SMARTER than Bush ever dreamed of being - in every possible way.
2006-07-22 20:49:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
By far Clinton, just compare the numbers and also the general happiness of the country. Clinton was a good time lots of money flowing around on the other hand both of the Bushes have been really bad, Neither one of them knows even the basics about economics, the money dries up small business suffers only the rich do well, yes it is true Clinton slept with a intern and they can't shutup about it, but hey atleast he didn't try and destroy the country like the evil Bush clan
2006-07-22 05:32:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton , by far and if he could run today , he would win again . The reason the Republicans passed a limit on the president's term , was because they didn't want a popular Democrat President to run forever .Bill Clinton is one that could have a third term . He did lie about sex but how many in office could say , that they haven't lied about the same thing . What about all the lies in Washington today . To bad there's not term limits on Congress too . .
2006-07-22 05:31:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton
2006-07-22 05:05:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by mks 7-15-02 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton
2006-07-22 05:05:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by Princess 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton
2006-07-22 05:03:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by Walli 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton - Clinton - Clinton. Unfortunately, all his achievements - balanced budget, booming ecoonomy etc. - were overshadowed by the conservative right's insistence upon impeaching him because he couldn't keep his pants zipped when he was around Porky, oops, Monica.
Bush on the other hand has gotten us a record deficit, a never-ending war, inflation, a falling economy, record-high gas prices, a shameful experience over Katrina and on and on and on.
Clinton was probably the best president of the last 50 years. Bush is probably the worst in history. He's a loser.
2006-07-22 05:09:49
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton was ELECTED president twice, by a large marjority of voters, and a larger majority of registered voters say they'd vote for him again if he could run again.
He was president during peacetime, and the neocons were so desperate to find him doing ANYTHING wrong, they spent more than $70,000,000 of OUR money to find him guilty of being a randy middle-aged man who gave in to a voluptuous seductress!
Surprise! And, I hate to bust your bubble, but he didn't LIE UNDER OATH.
He merely stated he did not sexually harass Paula Jones, and by gosh, he didn't. In fact, he's the only person in America who DIDN'T say anything about her.
Now, GW, on the other hand has not LEGALLY been elected.
And when the next national election comes, if he cnnot guarantee his party will win, he'll postpone the presidential election (as he has the right to do) and will declare martial law, and he will remain "president" - the first and only court-appointed president in history, and the first and only president "elected" illegally during the second election (there are dozens of documents - too numerous to list here) proving Kerry won the election - or would have had the votes been counted.
I know my answer isn't popular, but it's correct.
History will record the truth, and it will begin when the citizens of this country find their collective spine and make this criminal administration stop its chicanery and accept its punishment.
As we all know (at least those of us who listened in class) treason is punishable by death. Treason is exactly what has transpired during this administration.
And we'll have one last chance, I pray, to save our nation from totalitarianism.
Bushes do NOT rule!
2006-07-22 05:35:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by dragonheart 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
GWB had the guts to take on the world and do what He felt right. Clinton spent more time doing Monica and other tramps than doing what a president is supposed to do. Good guys may be popular in the party circuit but it takes a guy like Bush to keep our country free.
2006-07-22 05:07:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by old codger 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
basically as Democrats think of Clinton became into large and Republicans hated him, Republicans love GWB and Democrats hate him. while Clinton became into president, the monetary gadget became into large. Like breaking information large. With George W. Bush, the monetary gadget is low. the backside its been via fact the melancholy. i might say Clinton became into greater effective. yet human beings think of via fact he had an affiar that he became right into a foul president and that they do no longer concentration on what he did to make us of a greater effective. He lied as quickly as. and how many circumstances has Bush lied? i've got lost count selection via now. With Clinton, shall we stop residing in residences and ought to arise with the money for a magnificent abode. i won't have the ability to help yet ask your self what Bush's presidency could be like if 9/11 not at all occurred. each thing he's performed for the 5 years after 9/11 is led to via 9/11.
2016-10-08 05:01:02
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋