• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush with higher approval rating than Clinton?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<< In all fairness etech may just be suffering from the excessive heavy metals in our groundwater here in central Oklahoma >>

I disagree. Etech is about as Intelligent as they come(and a pure genuis for Oklahoma). That's why I am so dismayed when he sells himself out so easily.

Keep in mind that I'm not saying that Clinton was better, I'm just saying that comparing Bush to Clinton, at least the ratings doesn't mean that Bush is a Good President. I contend that he is a weak President and individual who is not in the white House based on any of his Merits (what merits?) he's only there because the Republican Leadership wanted him there because they have total control over him.




<< perhaps all those years in a Hanoi prison have twisted the mind of Senator McCain. >>

Yeah and perhaps all those years on your knees PalTroll have left a bad taste in your mouth.
 
hehe, now I know I have hit a nerve with the liberal minions. Tag team time. Hope you two have fun.

I have noticed that the liberals just spew rhetoric and rarely can back up anything they say, of course that does not stop them from saying it ad nauseum.

So have fun and keep spewing guys. I have researched and validated my position,
 
...IF...you remember, in a thread just over a week ago I was tagged 'liar' by certain Liberals because I stated Bush had higher approval ratings than Clinton....which I've proven is so...😀

That was my only purpose with this thread.

It's my belief that Bush does too much compromising, but it looks like he at least is stopping the Liberal agenda and winning the popular opinion polls at the same time.

Red Dawn, you will scald him regardless. Stick with the name calling and inuendos as that is your true form in political discussion.😛...if he'd given Taiwan their ships you'd be accusing him of wanting to start a war with China...claiming the Military Industrial Complex had him in their pocket.
 
So now it's &quot;If you don't suck up to Bush the the Republicans you are a Liberal&quot; BS . Nice try Etech, but it's not the case here. You are just controlled by your Bitch Masters, the Republicans. If anything I'm a Moderate who leans to the right. In fact on certain issues (like China) I am far more conservative than the Texas two Stepping Twit we have in the White House thanks to spineless individuals like you who were afraid to face up tpo theier Republican Bitch Masters.
 


<< So have fun and keep spewing guys. I have researched and validated my position, >>



Wait, what was your position again? That always seems to get lost in your blanket critiques of &quot;the liberals&quot;.
 
There's a rumor that this pole was actually conducted by people walking into bars and baseball games asking others if they like a &quot;Busch&quot; so I'm not sure how valid these numbers truely are!😉 LOL!🙂🙂
 
McCain is bent on grabbing power, and seems to care little about the Constitution which protects men from the powerful, run amuck..

I recall reading about another man like that in Germany in the 30s, his rise to power, caused WWII and cost the lives of millions. Foolish men who refused the freedom in God, allowed his ascendency.

Not here, not in the USA.
 
MrPALCO

Get a clue. The McCain/Feingold bill passed. The house version of Shays/Meehan bill was stymied because of technicalities on the vote anti finace reform republican leadership imposed on the vote process.

House procedure ?unfair,? ...

Scroll down in the article for a list of campaign contributers,and see if you can spot the paybacks in what has been forwarded for legislative action in the last 7 months.

Money talks,BS walks 😀


EDIT....... Are you comparing McCain to Hitler? if you are,you don't need a clue,you need a labotomy :|
 


<< McCain is bent on grabbing power, and seems to care little about the Constitution which protects men from the powerful, run amuck..

I recall reading about another man like that in Germany in the 30s, his rise to power, caused WWII and cost the lives of millions. Foolish men who refused the freedom in God, allowed his ascendency.

Not here, not in the USA. >>



MrPALCO, I suggest you ask for an increase in your dosage - you appear to be dangerously under-medicated.

I remain at a loss to understand how the Bush camp has, through smoke and mirrors, persuaded the constitutionally-ignorant members of the public that any of the proposed campaign finance reform legislation would in any way have encumbered the First Amendment. Apparently they have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, as we now have, er, patriotic Americans, like the invariably bizarre MrPALCO, comparing McCain to Hitler. Of course, some of us (including most folks who have actually studied the Constitution) would find such a comparison laughable and wildly disrespectful to Holocaust victims and WWII veterans, but hey . . .
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a 'carry-over' effect of approval ratings from one presidency to another? Clinton took office in '93 over Bush during a recession, and Bush Jr. took office over Clinton in '01 during a relatively strong economy. Maybe you should account for that before saying Bush is more popular with people than Clinton.
 


<< So now it's &quot;If you don't suck up to Bush the the Republicans you are a Liberal&quot; BS . Nice try Etech, but it's not the case here. You are just controlled by your Bitch Masters, the Republicans. If anything I'm a Moderate who leans to the right. In fact on certain issues (like China) I am far more conservative than the Texas two Stepping Twit we have in the White House thanks to spineless individuals like you who were afraid to face up tpo theier Republican Bitch Masters. >>



That's funny, on nearly every issue I've seen you speak on from the welfare state to energy policies to socialist programs, you seem to lean a bit to the left.
 


<< I remain at a loss to understand how the Bush camp has, through smoke and mirrors, persuaded the constitutionally-ignorant members of the public that any of the proposed campaign finance reform legislation would in any way have encumbered the First Amendment. >>



Money is an amplifier.

If groups of Men determine to band together, and use money to influence legislation (bribery excluded, of course) that is the way of free men.

The tiny emaciated spirits that seek to deny this right, are opposed to the spirit and intent of the Founding Fathers and their beloved US Constitution.

Live free and fight to retain our freedom.

🙂
 


<< Its not a phantom tax cut or just some stupid refund idea like the liberals always try to push through, next year you will actually pay less in taxes. The refund was ONLY the retroactive part of the tax cut kicking in, there's more to come. Hopefully a LOT more if bush has his way.

>>


The &quot;liberals&quot; enacted this retroactive tax cut. Bush was against it, but signed the bill anyway because he had to make a comprimise with the Democrats.

MrPalco: Money is not free speech. It is property. Your precious Supreme Court decided that. Live with it.

EDIT Tominator, you are still a damn liar, no matter what statistics you pull out of your ass, or a newspaper.
 
<<Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a 'carry-over' effect of approval ratings from one presidency to another? Clinton took office in '93 over Bush during a recession, and Bush Jr. took office over Clinton in '01 during a relatively strong economy>>

Not saying 100% that you're wrong, but as I recall, Bush Sr's approval rating skyrocketed after the election was over when he sent the troops to Somalia. So I'd imagine that if what you say is true, Clinton should have started out in pretty good shape.
 


<< Bush is ok if you hate the environment >>



I am still waiting for foolish Liberals to lead the way to &quot;environmental purity&quot; and begin walking to work.

Won't ever happen.

Liberalism is two faced and lacking in integrity.

🙂
 


<< I am still waiting for foolish Liberals to lead the way to &quot;environmental purity&quot; and begin walking to work.

Won't ever happen.

Liberalism is two faced and lacking in integrity. >>



The only reason that liberals do not walk to work is because it is not efficient, and impractical. There are many other ways to conserve. You can take the bus to work or carpool, for example. This conserves energy without being impractical. The point is something needs to be done nationally for people to understand that the environment will be destroyed if we don't do something. We can have more efficient fuel types along with preserving and setting aside more environmental areas. And for those of you who think it doesn't matter if the environment is destroyed, you should probably take a second look below the surface. The environment is necessary for many products that we use today. If you destroy all of the forests without replanting them, and instead build houses there, pretty soon you are out of wood. You can also say goodbye to all outdoor activities as well, not only will global warming have made the earth so hot it's unbearable outside, there won't be any grass or anything because of pollutants. I would think twice before criticizing environmentalists on their policies when you look at places like Los Angeles where it's Smog and pollution have practically destroyed the state.

One more note on the walking to work issue, new fuel cell cars will be coming out within the next few years which will give off virtually no pollution, and these will also allow environmentalists to go to work without polluting.
 


<< We can have more efficient fuel types along with preserving and setting aside more environmental areas. >>



Agreed. That fuel is nuclear fuel.

Call off your progress blocking nutcase-eco-wackos, and the community of capitalists will deliver to your doorstep, energy that requires no consumption of fossil fuel.

It is up to the &quot;environmentalists&quot; to get out of the way, or stop consuming the energy they so earnestly detest.

🙂
 
BrintonAA

Thats the dumbest post in this thread! LOL! Like Liberals are all carpooling? Riding the bus? We ARE replacing trees harvested and there are more trees now in the US than at any time in history...think before you post! LOL!

It's Liberals standing in the way of THE most practical form on energy....guess what that is....
 
No it's the Conservatives that refuse to improve energy efficiency and going for the I'm up for it drilling everywhere regardless of what animal or plant reside there except for joe-blow human. The only conservation is braincells to distinguish between whiskey and rum.
 
You'd think Bush talks in his dumbfounded manner because it's keeps the dissenters off guard. I think he's just got nothing to say. Don't you think the guy suffers from lack in skills and in knowing that, compensate the public with a rebate check. The guy wants to privatize social security during the election. Look at the stock market now. We'll see what happens next. Wasn't the election rigged too? What's not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top