English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

15 answers

At least Bush will be best at something (unfortunately he's best at being the worst).

2007-08-07 08:51:41 · answer #1 · answered by Mitchell . 5 · 1 0

Well, currently Warren G. Harding is considered the worst president ever. And The administration itself has done MUCH worse than things like the Teapot Dome scandal.
Or, worse than Watergate for Richard Nixon's presidency.
Or, much worse than screwing up reconstruction horribly.
Or eating turkey dinners in the white house nightly while the rest of the country suffered from the great depression.
Or the lame inaction of the Buchanan and Ford administrations.

So, you know, when you put modern partisan politics aside, and realize how horribly inept, corrupt, and construably criminal the administration is, I'm sure he'll near Pres. Harding deep within those presidential bowels somehow.

2007-08-07 16:15:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Here's what he has to do if he wants to supplant the current "worst president ever!" Create more government bureaucracy that does nothing but scoop money off the top of the service it's intended to help (Department of Education), implement policies that hurt "big business" and watch the unemployment rate go nuts, make decisions about the economy in such a wreckless way that the prime interest rate goes to 18% and people lose what they finance (cars, houses), implement policies that limit the production and importing of oil so that gas has to be rationed, and handle a hostage crisis through "diplomatic channels and the UN". Once George Bush accomplishes all this, he'll take Jimmy Carter's place.

2007-08-07 16:04:17 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

His presidency can't be judged for many years to come, but as far as polls, he has had the second lowest ever, but also the highest ever presidential aproval rating of 92% in late 2001.

2007-08-07 15:57:05 · answer #4 · answered by John S 4 · 0 0

He doesn't. Such things are determined many years after their administration, as people rarely have an objective view during the term.

President Clinton also deserves that same delay.

2007-08-07 15:51:52 · answer #5 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 0 0

-10

2007-08-11 02:31:17 · answer #6 · answered by little timmie 3 · 0 0

By most historians and political scientists it is too soon to tell. But the few that have usualy have him in the top10 worst.

I personaly believe he is 3rd, 2nd is hoover, and 1st is Jackson

2007-08-07 15:51:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

well lets see he got us out of the Clinton recession we have a booming economy we are winning the war on terror he hasn't given nuclear technology to any of our enemies so far he is doing better the the last 2 democrat presidents. but he is still no Ronald Reagan, the greatest president ever.

2007-08-07 15:54:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

I had no idea that GW and his administration had anything to do with the Carter Debacle,thank you for the enlightenment.

2007-08-07 15:51:17 · answer #9 · answered by fire_side_2003 5 · 1 0

Cant be determined yet, although young liberals will call him the worst even though they are clueless about history

2007-08-07 15:55:16 · answer #10 · answered by Antiliber 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers