Your call
2007-01-10 10:32:06 · 63 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Hahahahha! Pretty funny, got anymore?
2007-01-10 10:43:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 11⤊ 9⤋
Great president, but not the greatest. Washington and Lincoln will always come to people's minds when they hear the word president, because they greatly shaped the way America would turn out. It wasn't about political agenda, it was about the country. FDR had good intentions but a failed system and didn't have the right approach to the economy. Reagan brought back conservatism. He won the cold war. He was a great President. While Bush does have his shortcomings such as his stance on immigration, he knows the difference between good and evil and has always been willing to protect this country.
2007-01-10 10:47:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
During his first presidential campaign, he was vilified and ridiculed, not for his ideas, but for his unpolished appearance and his folksy accent and his lack of education. They called him stupid, an ape, a country bumpkin, and made fun of the way he pronounced his words.
His enemies declared that his election would be the end of everything good in the world. They threatened to leave the United States if he won -- this despite the fact that he was certainly the most moderate Republican who could have won his party's nomination.
He won on a fluke. If his main opponent's vote had not been diluted by third-party candidates, he most likely would have lost. As it was, he received far less than the majority of the vote.
He did not ask for the war that came on his watch, but he was grimly determined to see it through to victory. The trouble was, nobody thought he was doing it right.
The radicals in his own party demanded that he prosecute it one way; but he had to take into account the political reality that the country was divided and he could only wage war in a way that the people would support.
Even though his own party held a majority in both houses, he constantly had Congress looking over his shoulder. His cabinet contained some powerful personalities who thought they were better suited to make decisions than the ignorant man who had accidentally become president. And in the country at large, he was savaged in the press and second-guessed by everyone.
He made mistakes. He trusted the wrong man in some cases; he insisted on some military principles that made the war more difficult to win.
The war was still raging -- and with discouraging results, too many casualties, few visible signs of victory -- as the election approached. The candidate the Democrats ran against him was regarded by many as a war hero who everyone expected would find some compromise that would allow the United States to declare victory and bring the troops home without wasting any more soldiers' lives in a lost cause.
But the soldiers themselves knew better, and many political observers believed that in the election their absentee ballots might provide the margin of victory for the President they trusted. Of course these soldiers feared death and mourned the loss of brave friends who had already died or been crippled by war.
The soldiers preferred, however, to stay with the President they trusted to see the war through to victory. Why? Because if he won, then those deaths would mean something. And if the other fellow became President, then all those lost lives would have been spent for nothing at all.
In the long run, it was this President's courage and wisdom, his constant juggling of other people's priorities and his constant soothing of ambitious or angry or jealous or arrogant men that led to complete victory.
And a week after his second inaugural, he was shot to death by an actor who hated him and everything he stood for.
Yes.... ABRAHAM LINCOLN was probably our greatest president.
But when you look at the similarities, George W. comes close.
2007-01-10 10:47:12 · answer #3 · answered by dorbrendal 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If I HAD TO CHOOSE, great president.
But I don't think he is a great president, I'd give him a 4 out of 10.
Ever since so many innocent lives had been taken. If you could kill Saddam Hussein all along, then why risk the lives of others?
2007-01-10 10:45:36 · answer #4 · answered by Lone Star 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If you add bad after great and greatest, maybe both. I think he's worse than Clinton, and Clinton wasn't that great. Sorry if worst prestident in history wasn't a choice, but I'd have to choose that one.
He is so bad, I can't believe that people on here are actualy saying that he is any good.
2007-01-10 10:48:47 · answer #5 · answered by Weston 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would put him at great. He knew the Middle East and had a good feel for local difficulties and politics there. It is why he stopped short of the border during Gulf War 1.
Oh wait, you were talking about dubya weren't you?
2007-01-10 10:46:05 · answer #6 · answered by diogenese19348 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Why would you think that the dumbest President is also the greatest President? Do you have some kind of dummy fetish?
2007-01-10 10:47:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If we win in Iraq, he will become the Greatest President.
If the Terrorists & Democrats win in Iraq, he will only be a great president.
2007-01-10 10:48:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
When you come down off whatever you're smoking, look at the shape the country is in. look at the casualties in Iraq,and the 100's of billions wasted over there. Hurricane Katrina aid riddled with corruption, 9/11 happened while he was asleep at the wheel. The man's a complete ***. None of the above.
2007-01-10 10:45:32 · answer #9 · answered by doktordbel 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I think he's a great president, but not the greatest. I'd have to say Washington and Reagan tie for greatest president.
2007-01-10 10:45:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
Great. Greatest was probably Reagan.
2007-01-10 11:10:20 · answer #11 · answered by Mike J 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋