Zogby: In Crisis, It's Bush Over Clinton by Landslide

[Tripleshot]

>>>An entire List of attacks with next to no arrests under Billy Bubba doesn't convince you?<<<


I guess these guys just walked into jail and got convicted and sentenced under the nose of Clinton.

Life terms for embassy bombers


>>>Clinton can't take credit for the economic upturn.<<<

Yes he can. Dems give him the credit. Only right wing rush Limbuergerites rattle off the reagan equation.

Reagan was a good leader,as long as you didn't press him on his memory of giving guns to rebels.

If Bush senior was so good,why wasn't he re-elected?

It was the economy, stupid.

 

[Texmaster]

<< >>>An entire List of attacks with next to no arrests under Billy Bubba doesn't convince you?<<<


I guess these guys just walked into jail and got convicted and sentenced under the nose of Clinton.

Life terms for embassy bombers >>



LOL I'm sorry, who is president now?


And where are the people that attacked the Khol or the Maine barracks in Saudi Arabia?

Opps! Did we forget those?

 

[Beau]

<< >>>An entire List of attacks with next to no arrests under Billy Bubba doesn't convince you?<<< I guess these guys just walked into jail and got convicted and sentenced under the nose of Clinton. Life terms for embassy bombers >>



nonononono.... that wasn't clinton, that was the intelligence agencies. There's a LARGE difference between what Bush is doing right now and what happend with those bombers. Bush's is largely political and global. Bush is calling a lot of the shots and is actually strategizing (or at least making an effort to) this campaign. Do you honestly believe that Clinton had anything to do with the arrests? I'm sure he'd like to think so, but if it doesn't concern military action, he was most likely not directly involved in them. Yet another thing that he CANNOT take credit for.

 

[Rogue]

Clinton was a mouthpiece and a buttplug all rolled up into one. He talked good game, but was too busy screwing around (literally) in the White House rather than taking care of business. If he weren't such a pacifist, we may not have found ourselves in our current situation. It's about time we've got someone in office who's actually gonna do more than talk a good game.

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Heh, that poll could be a bit skewed simply by the fact that we're basically still -in- the crisis now.

 

[franksta]

i'm curious as to how the poll would have gone BEFORE september 11 and I'd also like to see how it looks a few years down the road.

 

[jjones]

you can't give clinton any credit for the economic situation under his presidency; the means for the economic growth this country experienced were already in place before he came into office. you don't just push the "improve economics" button one day and everything suddenly gets better. if anything, he can be blamed for our current economic decline and dilapidated military.

clinton was perhaps the biggest self-serving president of the 20th century. i'm not a clinton basher, i think he got beat on way too much for being a fool. but then again, he was a fool. and for those that don't remember the elections, clinton beat bush because bush had, bar none, the absolute worst election team on the planet. clinton was a nobody from a group of democratic nobodies at the time.

 

[StageLeft]

I really have to say that poll is entirely useless and meaningless. In times of tension and conflict people rally around their leader. Its nothing new. This is why Bush's popularity skyrocketed shortly after 9/11. Thus when you have 80-90% of the population supporting their leader it seems unlikely to expect them to say "But this guy would be better".

 

[Tominator]

It is no more useless or meaningful that in 8 years of Clinton polls just like this one were front page news nearly everyday! Clinton's policies were driven by polls.

Paybacks are a real bitch!

 

[Russ]

As much as I hate to sort of agree with the liberal, whiny Slick Willy ass kissing apologists, I have to point something out.

You could very likely replace "Bush" with "Republican" and "Clinton" with "democrat" and get the same poll results. We're at war. People want a Republican at the helm when the fighting needs to be done.

Russ, NCNE

 

[flavio]

<< That's the stupidest poll I ever heard off.
This one has a benefit of hindsight.
It's like if you ask who would you rather have as president during WW2, FDR or JFK? Who would you rather have as your first president, George Washington or Abraham Lincoln? Who would you rather have as president during Civil War? Lincoln or Teddy Rousevelt? Who would you rather be the president during the end of cold war? Ronald Reagan or Thomas Jefferson?
Please explain your answers.
The bottom line, we will never know who would be better president in this crisis. >>




Dumbass poll for republicans to feel good. Total bs.

ROSS PEROT WOULD HAVE A GREAT APPROVAL RATING RIGHT NOW IF HE DID SOMETHING ABOUT THE TERRORIST ATTACKS!

Dumbass opportunists. Why don't you just use the death of 1000's of Americans to push your agenda.

 

[hungrypete]

Look at the jackals. You all make me sick. I want to see that quote from Clinton with a link please, or else stop bashing him for it. I support Bush, but I didn't vote for him. Stop being sheep, Clinton wasn't that bad of a president, the media just had nothing better to do than to point out EVERY mistake.

 

[SuperTool]

Well, I can understand how some right-wingers will never get over Clinton. But he is no longer president, the game is over. So stop trying to score, because the crowd has left. Every attempt to attack Clinton during his presidensy ended up with conservatives with their face in the mud, and many great conservative leaders revealed as hypocrites.



<< An entire List of attacks with next to no arrests under Billy Bubba doesn't convince you? >>


Las time I checked, the conservatives were b!tching that Bubba was wagging the dog when Clinton struck afganistan. Once again these scumbags put their pursuit of Clinton ahead of the country's best interest.

Also, Dubya wasn't exactly tripping over himself to go get Bin Laden before 9.11 There was just no support for going after OBL full scale. The point is, this attack happened almost a year into GWB's presidency. It was under his watch. He was sleeping at the switch. Maybe if he paid more attention to international affairs, instead of whoring himself to his corporate donors, we wouldn't be in this predicament. Bush was an isolationist until 9.11, and paid little attention to international affars.
Bottom line, the buck stops with Dubya. He blew it. Stop blaming it on Clinton.

 

[XMan]

After the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, which killed six and injured 1,000, President Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed five U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, which killed 19 and injured 200 U.S. military personnel, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa, which killed 224 and injured 5,000, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

After the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole, which killed 17 and injured 3 U.S. sailors, Clinton promised that those responsible would be hunted down and punished.

He was right . . . he just didn't say that it would be Dubya doing it.

 

[hungrypete]

<< Bottom line, the buck stops with Dubya. He blew it. Stop blaming it on Clinton. >>



That's overboard too. It's not any of our faults. Our foreign policy isn't perfect, and it never will be. The bottom line is that we can't allow OTHER countries to encourage such violent 'retaliation' as we saw on 9.11.01, so stop bitching about the President, if anything is directly to blame, I guess it would be Carter's Camp David Accords.

 

[Tominator]

<< Every attempt to attack Clinton during his presidensy ended up with conservatives with their face in the mud, and many great conservative leaders revealed as hypocrites. >>



Ah HA! Only in the polls! Every Conservative with their face in the mud....RESIGNED! Many great Conservatives? 2 Maybe? again, THEY RESIGNED!

Clinton cost Gore AND the Democrats both houses of Congress AND a Presidency....not a very good political record...

So, let's see.....the Economy was a result of Copnservative Policies.....Clinton was and still is a huge liability to his Party....what did he do again? NOTHING of note unless you can brag about an impeached President....who held himself above the law.

Let's not forget over 70 folks close to this man died while he was in office....many of their deaths were mysterious to say the least.

Did not happen to Reagan, not Bush Sr. and you will not see it happen to GW either. The media made all kinds of excuses for him, not the least of which were the polls.

 

[hungrypete]

<<

<< Every attempt to attack Clinton during his presidensy ended up with conservatives with their face in the mud, and many great conservative leaders revealed as hypocrites. >>



Ah HA! Only in the polls! Every Conservative with their face in the mud....RESIGNED! Many great Conservatives? 2 Maybe? again, THEY RESIGNED!

Clinton cost Gore AND the Democrats both houses of Congress AND a Presidency....not a very good political record...

So, let's see.....the Economy was a result of Copnservative Policies.....Clinton was and still is a huge liability to his Party....what did he do again? NOTHING of note unless you can brag about an impeached President....who held himself above the law.

Let's not forget over 70 folks close to this man died while he was in office....many of their deaths were mysterious to say the least.

Did not happen to Reagan, not Bush Sr. and you will not see it happen to GW either. The media made all kinds of excuses for him, not the least of which were the polls. >>



That's a LOT of speculation you're vomiting up there, Tom.

 

[tcsenter]

<< The best economic times in 30 years under his watch, >>

No! We WANT Clinton to have all the credit, for the greatest speculative fantasy in the history of the stock market and the subsequent transfer of almost $1 trillion. The economy of 1996 - 2000 was a mirage, a speculative fantasy.

Actually, I don't blame any president for that. But if we want to go there, we can talk about just what the so-called 'economy' was really about.

 

[Swag1138]

Its all speculation.

I hate when people will spout off all kinds of speculation to support their ideas, but when somone else does it "Its speculation..its invalid"


Both sides do it, just burns my bubble is all.

Bush got more votes than Clinton did, either of his terms.
Bush had a high approval rating BEFORE 9-11
I would DEFINATELY want Bush in office for a crisis, Clinton wouldnt have any idea what to do.

 

[hungrypete]

<< Bush got more votes than Clinton did, either of his terms. >>



?
ummm, Bush lost the popular vote....

 

[SuperTool]

<<

<< Every attempt to attack Clinton during his presidensy ended up with conservatives with their face in the mud, and many great conservative leaders revealed as hypocrites. >>



Ah HA! Only in the polls! Every Conservative with their face in the mud....RESIGNED! Many great Conservatives? 2 Maybe? again, THEY RESIGNED!

Clinton cost Gore AND the Democrats both houses of Congress AND a Presidency....not a very good political record...

So, let's see.....the Economy was a result of Copnservative Policies.....Clinton was and still is a huge liability to his Party....what did he do again? NOTHING of note unless you can brag about an impeached President....who held himself above the law.

Let's not forget over 70 folks close to this man died while he was in office....many of their deaths were mysterious to say the least.

Did not happen to Reagan, not Bush Sr. and you will not see it happen to GW either. The media made all kinds of excuses for him, not the least of which were the polls. >>



These conservatives resigned in shame. Caught on hypocricy. They resigned the way Nixon resigned
The conservatives spent 8 years to try and impeach Clinton, and will spend another 80 years trying to justify it. History has never been kind to witchhunters and hypocrites.
Dubya cost the Republicans the senate. What's your point?
If Gore ran on the Clinton record, he would have won. Bottom line, Gore was a stigmatized and incompetent candidate, not taking credit where credit was due.
The economy was a result of conservative policies? Prove it. Was it just waiting for Clinton to show up during Reagan's and Bush's term?
The right-wingers want to boil down the whole Clinton presidency to Monica Lewinsky. But it just isn't flying, because people remember the 8 years of prosperity that we enjoyed with him in office. I know some of the rightwingers would rather we not have this prosperity in the 90's just so they could blame it on Clinton. Of course then it would have been his economy. Hypocrisy.
Enjoy

 

[Tauren]

<<Clinton can't take credit for the economic upturn. Everyone knows that was the Reagan effect. Just took ten years to be realized.>>

 

[tcsenter]

<< Its all speculation >>

While this is technically true, there are two types of speculation.

A. That a company who is actually making a profit will continue to do so.

B. That a company with no financial history whatsoever will make a profit - at some point - so we're gonna throw a lot of money at it in anticipation of a new market that may never come to pass.

Our "greatest economy" was about 80% type B.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Let me see if I understand . . .
1) anything good that happened in the past 20 years was a direct (or indirect) effect of policies of a conservative president (8 of 20; I don't consider GHW Bush conservative)
a conservative Senate (8 of 20), or conservative House (6 of 20)
2) anything bad was probably the fault of a liberal president (Hillary), liberal Senate, or liberal House
3) Reagan, Bush I policies lead to the dramatic economic expansion of the past two decades while the legislature was overwelmingly liberal BUT progress during the past 8 years was due to the conservative legislature in spite of the liberal executive
4) Reagan, Bush I kicked mad booty and brought criminals to justice in Grenada, Nicaragua, Lebanon . . . oops, Iraq . . . oops

For the sake of the future of real conservatives, forget Bill Clinton . . . I have. Our current president requires no yardstick because our quandry is unique. President Bush deserves accolades for his triumphs (marshalling support at home and abroad for our "conflict" with terrorism) and ridicule for the debacles (the duck/cover maneuver on 9/11 and the subsequent transparent attempts to deny it was a duck/cover).

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

This is a stupid thread because that is a stupid survey question. Anyone who knows anything about survey design would point out that a question like that will bias the results. It doesn't matter who was in office, given the current state of affairs, most people would support the incumbant.


Perhaps the only thing you can gleam from that survey question is that MOST people support the current US policy.