Blair, who had years to go on his elected term of office, fell waaay out of favor with the British people, according to the polls, because of the Iraq fiasco. When his party got clobbered in midterm elections he resigned in a week.
So what excuse does Bush have for stubbornly ignoring the people's will and hanging around when he is far less popular than Blair?
2007-05-10 01:41:25 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
He does not believe in accountability.
2007-05-10 01:59:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
in the event that they fought one yet another in a bypass i think of Blair might extremely emerge the victor. Bush may be too previous and the extra youthful Blair might immediately get the top hand. i will think of Bush enjoying grimy and doubtless pulling Blair's hair or possibly stamping on his hands, yet ultimately i think of Blair might triumph. as quickly as he'd recovered Bush might retaliate by ability of nuking the united kingdom and asserting warfare on all issues British. even even with the incontrovertible fact that the warfare may be unlawful it does not cease united statesa..
2016-10-15 06:43:12 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well you have to remember that we arent europeans, we dont quit on a dime.
Furthermore, principled leaders like President Bush see to it that they run their military operations to conclusion, not pullout the very second the poll numbers drop. What kind of way is that to lead a country? Dont forget that the american people wanted the war just as much as anybody in washington, and so did most democrats who voted for it based on their own analysis of the evidence available and nothing Bush said.
Running the free world isnt a popularity contest, its about campaigning on principles of who you are and promising the American people you are going to be to true to yourself and your character and do things you said you would and Bush has been every bit of that!
If you dont like it, either vote for spineless jellyfish democrats that often dont have the courage to implement their beliefs, or move to Europe.
2007-05-10 02:15:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
According to the recent polls that you hold so dear Bush is not LESS popular than Blair, they were equal at 28%...I often wonder who does these polls...according to YA participants it really seems more evenly split.
That being said I would like to say that it is only your opinion that he is making bad decisions...only time will tell if they are good or bad choices...no matter who you are, there will always be someone who supports you and someone who doesn't...which one is right? One may be short sighted, fear change...the other may see long term benefits and understand what your doing...as I said, time is the only unbiased judge. and since Bush believes in what he's doing...there is no reason he should give up.
2007-05-10 02:12:00 · answer #4 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
From what I understand,the British next Prime Minister is more conservative than Blair. I would be in favor of someone more conservative than Blair and Pres. Bush. But you have to hand it to Bush and Blair,they are standing on principle and doing what is right ,not whats popular. That is the mark of good leaders!
2007-05-10 01:51:57 · answer #5 · answered by roysbigtoys 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Different type of government.
Blair served 10 years.
So are you saying Bush should get an extention.
Just because you don't like Bush doesn't mean he has to resign.
We have an election coming up I would work on that and see what you can do about side lining Hilary and Obama if you don't want a GOP win.
2007-05-10 01:53:44 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
As a typical liberal you are making huge assumptions Bush received 53% of the popular vote last election just because liberals ***** and holler the loudest you are assuming that all Americans feel this way, well if all Americans felt that way about the president how do you explain how he got more people voting for him than any president in American history.....anyone?
2007-05-10 01:55:45 · answer #7 · answered by Ynot! 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
GW Bush is neither decent nor honorable. So, expect that he won't do what Tony Blair had done.
2007-05-11 01:29:15 · answer #8 · answered by Botsakis G 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He will. In fact, he'll step down sooner... after 8 years, President Bush will leave office.
Tony Blair was in for 10.
2007-05-10 02:00:50 · answer #9 · answered by Paul McDonald 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Tony Blair imagines HE is first in line to be president of the 'newly-to-be-formed' European State. So he's running from his responsibilities, passing them on to the biggest bafoon in history, Gordon Brown.
He hopes people will forget that he and Bush are 'personally' responsible for the loss of 1,000's of innocent lives in Iraq.
Bush, on the other hand, has no escape route yet. Unless he joins Al Gore on the ''Green' bandwagon he has rolling along with unstoppable 'phoney' momentum.
Simple really.
Pete.
2007-05-10 01:48:19 · answer #10 · answered by Peter M 2 · 2⤊ 3⤋
There are some people who believe Mr. Blair pulled a "cut and run"...Mr. Bush" is" doing the decent and honorable thing by staying and completing his task.
2007-05-10 02:10:05 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋