What about Bush?

Remove all ads!

I'm interested to know what people (especially residents outside of the U.S.) think about President Bush. As an American, I am ashamed to call him our president. I think he gives the impression that the U.S. is populated by a bunch of hick-cowboys. He has dangerously blurred the lines between the separation of church and state. The economy has struggled. He has absolutely no environmental programs in place. He has sent us into a war (in which we are spending nearly $1 billion per week on) under false pretenses. Here's one point that I haven't seen brought up before, and I just can't get it to add up. If Saddam didn't have WMD (and evidently he did not) why was he so reluctant to let weapons inspectors into his country?

Anyway, I know that Americans are pretty split over Bush. His approval rating for the last several months has hovered at just over 50%. I'm looking for opinions from other countries. What do you people think about the U.S., the war in Iraq, and specifically the president?

 

As a citizen of a weasel nation I will make this short and sweet.
I fear Bush and his buddies have damaged Americas image in the world to no end. They continue to do so.
Insulting and alienating close allies, breaking international law, fooling around with the fragile unity of Europe, Guantanamo (the way the prisoners are treated there disgusts me), disregard for international treaties, the UNO and the International Court in Den Haag, Kyoto Protocol - it goes on and on.

It is so sad how he and his administration managed in no time to turn the global sympathy and support for the US after 9/11 into resentment by showing little to no skill in diplomacy and replacing it with arrogant behaviour.

And his quite scarry religious impetus is the very last thing we (the western world) need at a time in which the islamic world feels threatened in its traditional way of life.

Needless to say I have been against the recent war.

 

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000033#000000

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000098#000000

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000245#000005

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000341#000000

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000344#000000

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000420#000000

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000425#000000

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000455#000001

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000504#000000

http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=20;t=000523#000000

Edit - there are 150 topics dealing with Bush according to a quick search. The above are just some about him, no rhyme or reason as to why they were picked, that may answer your question.

 

Thanks Laches. I read through those posts. I wasn't necessarily looking to see all those anti-Bush comments though. I know the arguements that people make against him, and I agree with nearly all of them. What I want to know - and you don't necessarily get this from the newspapers, and other media - is what public opinion is of Bush in foreign countries. Not necessarily individual people's opinions, although they are certainly welcome to share. What do people in Canada, Europe, etc. think about Bush? Not individually necessarily, but as a whole?

 

Well, as your closest neighbour, Canada is probably one of your more sympathetic allies. We didn’t join the Iraq invasion, and even though I personally agreed with this, there were a lot of Canadians who thought we should have shown support for our “best friend”. Canada/U.S. relations are currently not the greatest; this is due in part by our decision on Iraq, but also in part to our idiotic prime minister’s seemingly total lack of ability when it comes to foreign diplomacy. Good thing he's resigning some time in the next 2 months.

Having said that, I think Canadians in general feel about the current administration much the same as everyone else – they are screwing up left, right and centre. The arrogance, ass-covering and incompetence being displayed is astounding. We don’t, however, extend those negative sentiments to the country in general, and certainly not to its citizens.

 

Ah, I see. I'm not sure if these sort of get what you're looking for:

There is a bit in there about the opinion on Bush:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2747175.stm

Unlike some others, I think that opinion on America in general is linked to opinion regarding the administration. I know there seems to be a strong correlation between decreasing poll numbers regarding the US and Bush at the same time. I believe there is a causal connection there as well. Despites some protests to the contrary - I think what the world says about the US in general is tied to what it thinks about Bush in the world's mind.

And, here is another:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/03/uttm/main542472.shtml

In short, I think the world doesn't like Bush. Part of that is justifiable and part of it isn't (he wasn't liked by some way before he had a chance to do anything for example because he hadn't toured through Europe for example; to me, it isn't particularly relevant whether a Pres has been to Europe prior to election particularly if he's spending time dealing with his neighbor Mexico but that's neither here nor there).

So, the world doesn't like Bush. And tied to that, it doesn't particularly like America. According to the polls and this forum anyways.

 

quite right Laches. I think one of the reasons is that most european countries from a default point of view, is against war except for under enforced circumstances.

Generalized I guess I don't like Americans, because the image I see of that people as a group is the image of their leader, Bush. Now, Bush I never liked in the first place (democrat here), and I thought Afghanistan war was understandable, and to some point acceptable as cause and reason pretty much went hand in hand.

Then came the Iraq situation, and the cause and reasoning no longer seemed to make quite as much sense as previously. Which, from my perspective, makes the US as a nation lose a great deal of credibility.

Though the most americans I know "personally" over the net are the greatest bunch I've ever "met"

My personal idea of Bush.. a Texan Gunslinger.

 

Bush for me is one the worst nation leaders ever. He managed to take a pretty good stance of the whole world towards USA to trash with just one move war without logic in Iraq. Maybe he is not able to keep up the standards of previous presidents, maybe he is just a puppet maybe he lacks brain, there can be a number of reasons for his failure. But his general attitude shows to me a guy who has a complex (best his father) and this complex is his nemesis. I want to say that my thoughts and feelings about Bush do not extend to the rest of the USA citizens, allthough i do hate the fact that the media manipulation have made a lot of US citizens see the world from a point of view i find terrifying. But again they are not to blame.

I have a pretty good answer for this. If you remember the first weapons inspectors were forced to leave Iraq under the accusation of spying. More speciffically Saddam feared (maybe he had good reasons for this) that some guys that were there as weapons inspectors were undermining his regime and planned to topple him. He had said that there were USA spies within their ranks. He may have been right he may have been wrong, we will never learn, but i have heard in the news last week that a couple of months before the invasion he tried to contact USA administration giving nearly everything they wanted (as he did publicly by accepting any demand President Bush stated publicly too). He was hooked with his chair and was willing to do anything needed to keep the reigns of Iraq or at the worst (for him scenario) to be able to flee without the fear of having always someone hunting him. Anyway in the story the middleman was an American- Arab bussinesman who said on the TV that indeed he understood that the Iraqie side was pretty sincere and was willing to reach an agreement but Perle dismissed the whole issue without second thought.

 

I've been living in Europe for some time. To coin a phrase, the party is definitely over for Americans here.

 

Well, most of you probably know this already, but by all estimates here, Bush will probably win re-election next year, meaning we could be stuck with this guy through 2008. The United States does not have a constitution like Canada or Britain that allows for our President (or Prime Minister as the case may be) to be quickly replaced. Barring an impeachment (which requires the President to do something illegal), the President is there for four years after being elected. Sadly, moronic leadership does not qualify as a crime.

For those of you who are wondering why someone with the track record of Bush would get re-elected, I'll give you two reasons:

1. The economy after three sluggish years is finally turning around. The biggest indicator of whether or not a president gets re-elected is the state of the economy. The average person doesn't give a rat's ass about what's going on in Iraq if he can't find a job to support his family. So, if more people are finding jobs, and relate the improved economy to Bush's economic strategies, he will likely be re-elected.

2. He will probably wait until just before the fall elections (sometime next summer) to bring the troops home. The war is becoming less and less popular in the U.S., which is typical. Citizens of the U.S. are usually very supportive of a war, and even a high number of casualties in a war if they clearly understand what the war is accomplishing. However, I don't think anyone has a clear idea about what is going on in Iraq. If the goal is to set a government up in Iraq, and then get out, I can see no real progress in the last several months towards that goal - and that's why the war is unpopular. We don't mind sending our boys over to foreign shores, and understand that in war casualties are unavoidable. However, we don't accept seeing our soldiers die for what appears to be no reason.

Regardless, Bush will probably be president after next year.

 

Aldeth, I'm hoping you're wrong.

There is no realistic end in sight for this war, so if he pulls out early to sway voters, we'll be pretty well screwed internationally. As of now, they have no exit strategy they're discussing publicly. If they do pull out early, somebody's going to get screwed. But as long as the American people are pacified for the moment, somehow I don't think this will matter and Bush's numbers will go up.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/870749.asp?0cv=CA01

Also, his approval ratings are about 50% right now and falling, despite the recent reports of economic growth and him taking total credit for it. Also, in the same recent poll I read (can't find the source) about 52% of voters said they WOULD NOT re-elect Bush, despite a lightly higher percentage who approve of the job he's doing. This says to me that even those who back him now think we deserve someone better.

And we do.

 

I'm not so sure. Look at it this way - his numbers are where they were just before 9/11. There was a surge of support similar to the surge that occurs in any nation (UK is a good example) and now that surge has returned to where it was. It isn't that he is losing his supporters - it's that he's losing those people who were momentary supporters due to 9/11 but probably wouldn't have voted for him anyways. For example, he has 89% approval amongst Republicans still, 54% approval among Independents, and 23% approval among Dems. I suspect the drop has occurred with the Dems and to a lesser extent the independents.

One interesting thing to me from the poll numbers is the apparent development of a "9/11 generation" as I've seen it termed. Those Americans aged 18-29 have more favorable views of Bush than do Americans over the age of 30. Also, the 18-29 year olds have a higher support of the war. Another interesting trend is that there is a disappearing gender gap with the female support of the 'war on terror' and approval question within the margin of error of the men.

If the democrats lose their advantage with women it could spell trouble.

Some reasons for this I've heard are that with attacks in America women now see a more immediate threat where in the past they did not. Women tend to be more 'security' concerned than men and they now perceive a real threat. Also, with the younger group of 18-29 year olds 9/11 has become a defining event and there is no memory of Vietnam to obsess upon.

The birth of the South Park Republicans I've heard them called.

Here are some polls:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr031105.asp

here

[ November 14, 2003, 17:33: Message edited by: Blackthorne TA ]

 

From the experience I have had with the people around here the most noticeable feeling people have concerning Bush II is disbelief. People just cant understand how a person that he can run the most powerful entity ever on the face of this planet. Heck, I stop and look behind the jokes made about Bush II the laughter dies in my throat. Bush II and his admnistration scares me, I was not fond of Clinton and American presidents are generally not very popular around here but those guys were atleast politicians, people you could understand if not agree with.
I do put a lot of the blame on the 9/11 attacks, those acts of terror brought out the worst in an administration with a very old fashioned and paranoid view of the world, even if some people in the administration (Wolfowitz) had been praying for a new Pearl Harbour so he could try out his theories on the international stage.
Bush II himself isnt really the problem, he is more or less just a recovering alcoholic and possible drugaddict who found religion and got his life somewhat straight but he had a name and that was all that matters.

Do you all think we will see Jeb for president 2008? George should repay the favour Jeb did him in the -00 election.

 

Some of the analysts here say he wont be re-elected. But things tend to turn out in an unpleasant way. So it will be Bush again. Depressing.

I would like to know why the US population would vote for him?

Economy is pretty much its own beast, if you know what I mean. Governments have little influence on it. They get bashed if it stagnates, of course, and will try to take credits when it prospers. Its understandable, not accurate. All they do is increase/decrease tendencies by making some right/wrong decisions. At least thats how I understand it.

More importantly - dont the US folks care about the way he messes with friends? Crappy foreing policy anyone?
Now, we are not the US but if our chancelor would endanger good relations with other nations like that he would be twisting in the winds real soon.

What about the false accusation of WMD in Iraq? He started a war because of this! All who had reservations about WMD and concernces about the aftermath of the war found themself labeled as wussies. When looking at Iraq today everyone who had reservations was right.

Doesnt the US care at all??
If thats the case then it reflects very poorly on a major part that society.

[ November 14, 2003, 18:21: Message edited by: Dendri ]

 

Hm, I do not know, really, but I think maybe the situation is similar to the UK. The oppisition party, in this case the Tories, is just lying around in pieces, not able to do anything. That is, the tories just are weak for internal reasons and try to reform themselves, but just seem not to be able to do it. So I think it is of nearly no importance how bad Blair ever would look, because there's no chance for the Tories to gain anything from it as long as they are in "turbulence". And the lib-dems are still to small. So...

I think maybe it's the same in the US. It does not matter how bad Bush would look, there are propably too many voters for which the democrats are no viable option at all, i.e. there is nearly no working oposition. And as there's no noteworthy third-party, it would propably be quiet an unbelievable trick to pull for Bush to be not voted into office again.

 

@ Blackthorne

I dont get what you are trying to say here. Or maybe I do. Its a matter of perspective.

But: Bush (with his head full of funny ideas and dubious people like Perle & Wolfowitz 'advising' him) feels like some 'Gods chosen', goes against the UNO and int. law, implementing pre-emptive strike tactics and its Schröder, by refusing to give into this foolish adventure, who endangers something? Sure. That makes sense. "Do what you are being told or face the consequences"

That is a way to treat underlings, BTA, not equals. And some would do well to remember that.

By the way, not the disagreement between Bush and Chiraq/Schröder was so unheard of. The US and Europe have clashed on other occaisons, too. Rather all the insults and name calling are new. Remember Rumsfeld?

>Edit< Well, there are Americans who see things like Bush does and deem the displayed treatment of international opposition as adequat. Probably enough for another Presidency. That answeres my question, in a way.

[ November 14, 2003, 19:55: Message edited by: Dendri ]

 

@ Dendri

Maybe what BTA means is stuff like this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2923559.stm

Remember, you just said governments have very little effect on the economy.

I knew about the above off the top of my head because we talked about it a long time ago. Bush deserves more than a small portion of blame in the worsening diplomatic relationships between the US and abroad. But it is naive to think that it has been a one way street.

 

Actually, he's OK IMO and not as bad as I thought he would be. When he was first elected I thought he was just going to be some right wing clown, but then 9/11 happened which really tested him as a statesman. His response was both mature and restrained. He clearly stated that the enemy were international terrorists and not muslims and he condemned without reservation attacks on American muslims.

Afghanistan as a country had been completely subverted by Al-Qaeda for its own ends. Al-Qaeda paid the bills, and their Taliban allies did whatever they were asked. The allied war was swift and crushing and removed possibly the most reprehensible regime in the world. Americans and Britons should be proud of this achievement, not ashamed.

As for Iraq, I personally was surpised that no WMD were found, given that Saddam carried on his WMD programs under the noses of weapon inspectors during the 1990s. But who cares anyway? For once in our lives, some democratic governments were willing to act to depose a tyrant. The worst dictators should no longer feel safe to act as they please within their own borders. That they were able to do so until now was a legacy of cynical cold war politics, where the Soviet Union and US each had their client despots. A world without Saddam, his sons and his generals is a brighter place. America and her allies are still fighting an insurgency in Iraq, but don't imagine that it's a popular one. I'm certain that the Iraqis will be damned glad to see the back of the Americans, British and the rest - who wouldn't be? - but I'm equally certain that they will embrace liberty if given the chance.

As for his economic policies, they're standard rightwing stuff as far as I can tell (lower taxes, reduced government spending, etc.). Good reason to vote him out of office if you don't agree with them, but no good reason to hate him.

Remember: you live in a democracy; if you despise your president just vote against him.