Most historians consider the Bush presidency one of the worst in US history, why is that their conclusion?

Answer 1

You most have access to historians that are able to divine the future because last I checked Bush is- at present- the President.

Answer 2

I think most historians reserve judgement on presidencies until they are over and usually until they are over for a few years and the actual results of the policies are recorded. Without praising or condemning Bush I don't see how anyone calling themselves a historian can make judgements on anything that has not yet moved into history since the results are not in yet.The good ones usually wait until they have all the information. Just who are the "Historians" you are quoting?

Answer 3

Since George W. Bush is still in office, I don't think it's quite fair to assert that historians are already making claims about how the Bush presidency stands up against those of the past. Rather, what has been floating around the political commentary arena are comparisons drawn by cable news anchors, bloggers, etc., comparing the current presidency with tremendously unsuccessful ones of the past. I think it's still a bit too soon to claim that historians are analyzing the Bush presidency, and a bit safer argument, or question rather, would be to ask why are news anchors and political bloggers condemning this presidency? Also, you might want to take into account the fact that this happens with every presidency as each president has his critics and those who will compare him to each failed presidency of the past.

Answer 4

probable as a results of fact it quite is the only shitty presidency that the historians for my area lived by. except they have been alive for Hoover or Taylor or Tyler or Harrison or ******* grant. they could bear in mind Nixon, yet no, Bush is worse. Yeah, so he's retarded whilst it comprises national emergencies, yet so replaced into Hoover! Yeah, he trusted his generals, yet so did Taylor! to no longer say the least bit that i'm a Bush supporter or perhaps Republican. I do exactly no longer think of his blunders have been the worst or perhaps the 1st ones made.

Answer 5

Some opinions are just driven by their own selfishness. You will have to reconsider a lot of things first before completely believing what their words would say. For example, the one who said that might be a member of another party that oppose the president so much. Or someone who dtest all his projects, a critic who has nothin to do or other things. There were more presidents in the past who were involved in scandals and other unacceptable things unbecoming of a president. They were not only discussed because the dreadful thing might be multiplied and that other leadres of our time might imitate them thinking that it was right.
You see when you are on top you become a different person other that yourself, the president being at the everest of power acts according to what he sees right from where he is situated now( at the top) and in executing things he might bang into other people for the welfare of a greater cause and that person might vow to avenge himself to the point of creating words to stain the president and change his image in the eye of the public.

Answer 6

A true...professional historian judging an historical event before it is actually history? Please give us a list of these recognized historians.....right...just as I thought. More made up BS by Bush Bashers.....

Check your recent history and see how President Carter's inglorious Presidency is rated.

Answer 7

Time will tell about the legacy of the Bush presidency, but it doesn't look good. he said in the 2000 election that he was a uniter not a divider but he will not listen to the ones that disagree with him (former members of his own cabinet, not just democrats). he is going to do whatever he wants and thats not a sign of a good president. he needs to listen to the people and the people around him. he has made mistakes that is clear but he will not admit to those mistakes and how can you correct your mistakes when you don't even admit that you have made mistakes.

Answer 8

Historians already regard Bush as 'history'?

Cool...

Answer 9

Other than your own idiotic Bush-bashing attitude, you have absolutely nothing to back that up. You just pull these stratements out of the air and proclaim them to be the truth when you know full well it's nothing more than your own fabrication. You have no integrity and should be ignored.

Answer 10

He has stated early on that he does not represent everyone, he represents only the people who voted for him. A good president represents ALL of his people as best as he can and doesn't just look out for like faiths, beliefs, and interrests...We are a nation of many, not just Texan religious finatics.

Regarding the war, it has come out in numerous news broadcasts that Bush and others knew there were not certain things in Iraq... they skewed the facts to fit their desires. Also, we were attacked by Al Quaeda (* sp?), went after them, didn't get immediate results, so we went after Hussein (not that he didn't need it too, but this was a detour...)...