Bush & Clinton Most Admired in America

[Moviefan2k4]

His administration was partially responsible for hanging Saddam Hussein, for one. Also, he did have the proverbial "balls" to engage Al Qaeda after 9/11, where other Presidents may have backed down.

 

[Addendum]

As corrupt as Hussein's regime was, it was the only thing that held Iraq together. The way things have transpired in Iraq since the invasion isn't something anyone would want to take credit for.

Any president would have gone after those responsible for 9/11

 

[Docker2.0]

His administration was partially responsible for hanging Saddam Hussein, for one. Also, he did have the proverbial "balls" to engage Al Qaeda after 9/11, where other Presidents may have backed down.

My gawd man! you acn't be this blind!!

 

[Mr. Socko]

Congrats to Bush and Clinton. Fantastic leaders, I admire them both.

 

[Docker2.0]

Congrats to Bush and Clinton. Fantastic leaders, I admire them both.

You sux!

 

[The Senator]

His administration was partially responsible for hanging Saddam Hussein, for one. Also, he did have the proverbial "balls" to engage Al Qaeda after 9/11, where other Presidents may have backed down.

Bush may have gone after Al Qaeda on a much larger scale than other Presidents. Actually, the only President who could have gone after Al Qaeda was Clinton, since the organization did not exist in its current state until the early-to-mid 1990s. He went after them, but he didn't declare that the U.S. was at war with them. Certainly, he should have done more. I can see why many people fault him with that. But people forget that Bush hasn't been the perfect little leader when it comes to taking out the number one terrorist organization. People who support him fail to recall that we haven't caught Osama bin Laden. We haven't even dampened Al Qaeda's efforts, if you want to know the truth of it. They're still planning destruction throughout the world. Bin Laden's still alive, and I'm quite certain that he's still orchestrating efforts to overthrow Middle Eastern and western societies alike.

Instead of finding and killing Bin Laden and all the holy rollers at the top of Al Qaeda's chain of command, we have gone into completely different territory. We went after a dictator who-- while a horrible, despicable person-- had very little ties to Al Qaeda. We've been taking a five year detour in Iraq, while the terrorists are still out there, plotting revenge or Jihad or whatever catch phrase you'd like to call it. But I will give you one thing: Bush certainly has balls. Anyone has to if they're willing to sacrifice their political legacy and the entire reputation of the country which they lead on intuition.

 

[kedrell]

Hillary the most admired woman?!! I smell something rotten in Denmark. Bush is hard to buy as well, but she takes the taco. Damned woman is practically Satan incarnate.

 

[C.F. Kane]

Bush still has admirers?

 

[dpm07]

Bush may have gone after Al Qaeda on a much larger scale than other Presidents. Actually, the only President who could have gone after Al Qaeda was Clinton, since the organization did not exist in its current state until the early-to-mid 1990s. He went after them, but he didn't declare that the U.S. was at war with them. Certainly, he should have done more. I can see why many people fault him with that. But people forget that Bush hasn't been the perfect little leader when it comes to taking out the number one terrorist organization. People who support him fail to recall that we haven't caught Osama bin Laden. We haven't even dampened Al Qaeda's efforts, if you want to know the truth of it. They're still planning destruction throughout the world. Bin Laden's still alive, and I'm quite certain that he's still orchestrating efforts to overthrow Middle Eastern and western societies alike.

Instead of finding and killing Bin Laden and all the holy rollers at the top of Al Qaeda's chain of command, we have gone into completely different territory. We went after a dictator who-- while a horrible, despicable person-- had very little ties to Al Qaeda. We've been taking a five year detour in Iraq, while the terrorists are still out there, plotting revenge or Jihad or whatever catch phrase you'd like to call it. But I will give you one thing: Bush certainly has balls. Anyone has to if they're willing to sacrifice their political legacy and the entire reputation of the country which they lead on intuition.

This is a very true post, and one I personally support.

 

[Handsome Rob]

Gallup is one of the most respected polling organizations in the world. CNN partners with them all the time. I highly doubt the results are "rigged." Here's a quote from the article:

"The incumbent president is almost always the most admired man in such polls."

Also, keep in mind that he only received 29% of the vote. That's it. While it may rank him number one, it's hardly a majority and is entirely plausible.

 

[2star]

Americans *shakes head*

 

[Obi-Ron]

Gallup is one of the most respected polling organizations in the world. CNN partners with them all the time. I highly doubt the results are "rigged."

And yet they won't say where they got the 1000 adults they polled.

"People can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that. "
--Homer Simpson

 

[Handsome Rob]

And yet they won't say where they got the 1000 adults they polled.

"People can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that. "
--Homer Simpson

Actually, they do.

"These results are based on telephone interviews with a randomly selected national sample of 1,011 adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Dec. 14-16, 2007. For results based on this sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum error attributable to sampling and other random effects is ±3 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/103462/Hillary-Edges-Oprah-Most-Admired-Woman-07.aspx

The Homer Simpson quote, though, is something to keep in mind when reading ANY poll, as Gallup notes the problems inherent in statistical sampling and extrapolation to the population as a whole.

 

[Docker2.0]

I take it you really believe this "random" poll. The poll is complete bs.

 

[Kelly]

You are actually callinga a Gallup Poll, the most respected poll world wide, used by countless respected magazines and news programs worldwide BS????

Whether you agree with the poll or not is really irrelevant.....its a poll of a group of people. Polls in general are only a snapshot....but to call it BS, simply because you disagree is hmmmmm....biased? lmao

Oh, and I love the Homer quote up there Obi....lol

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Holy Cow.

Does moviefan really live in a fantasy world where another president, when faced with the aftermath of 9/11, WOULDN'T have tried to find the people responsible and make them pay?

The most peace-loving, wussy president on Earth would still go after them.

Please, dude.
Have you ever been right about anything?

 

[Kelly]

Bush may have gone after Al Qaeda on a much larger scale than other Presidents. Actually, the only President who could have gone after Al Qaeda was Clinton, since the organization did not exist in its current state until the early-to-mid 1990s. He went after them, but he didn't declare that the U.S. was at war with them. Certainly, he should have done more. I can see why many people fault him with that. But people forget that Bush hasn't been the perfect little leader when it comes to taking out the number one terrorist organization. People who support him fail to recall that we haven't caught Osama bin Laden. We haven't even dampened Al Qaeda's efforts, if you want to know the truth of it. They're still planning destruction throughout the world. Bin Laden's still alive, and I'm quite certain that he's still orchestrating efforts to overthrow Middle Eastern and western societies alike.

Instead of finding and killing Bin Laden and all the holy rollers at the top of Al Qaeda's chain of command, we have gone into completely different territory. We went after a dictator who-- while a horrible, despicable person-- had very little ties to Al Qaeda. We've been taking a five year detour in Iraq, while the terrorists are still out there, plotting revenge or Jihad or whatever catch phrase you'd like to call it. But I will give you one thing: Bush certainly has balls. Anyone has to if they're willing to sacrifice their political legacy and the entire reputation of the country which they lead on intuition.

I agree with your statement....


Does not mean you can't find at least 25% of a group of Americans who respect the president.....thats not exactly an unheard of thing in any presidency....

 

[Kelly]

Holy Cow.

Does moviefan really live in a fantasy world where another president, when faced with the aftermath of 9/11, WOULDN'T have tried to find the people responsible and make them pay?

The most peace-loving, wussy president on Earth would still go after them.

Please, dude.
Have you ever been right about anything?

Hmmmmm....even though I agree with you.......Carter would have probably ****ed it up even worse....


And I'm sure Moviefan has been right a couple of times.........as have most around here with differing opinions.

 

[jaguarr]

Bush may have gone after Al Qaeda on a much larger scale than other Presidents. Actually, the only President who could have gone after Al Qaeda was Clinton, since the organization did not exist in its current state until the early-to-mid 1990s. He went after them, but he didn't declare that the U.S. was at war with them. Certainly, he should have done more. I can see why many people fault him with that. But people forget that Bush hasn't been the perfect little leader when it comes to taking out the number one terrorist organization. People who support him fail to recall that we haven't caught Osama bin Laden. We haven't even dampened Al Qaeda's efforts, if you want to know the truth of it. They're still planning destruction throughout the world. Bin Laden's still alive, and I'm quite certain that he's still orchestrating efforts to overthrow Middle Eastern and western societies alike.

Instead of finding and killing Bin Laden and all the holy rollers at the top of Al Qaeda's chain of command, we have gone into completely different territory. We went after a dictator who-- while a horrible, despicable person-- had very little ties to Al Qaeda. We've been taking a five year detour in Iraq, while the terrorists are still out there, plotting revenge or Jihad or whatever catch phrase you'd like to call it. But I will give you one thing: Bush certainly has balls. Anyone has to if they're willing to sacrifice their political legacy and the entire reputation of the country which they lead on intuition.

I agree with all of this, and it's a classic example of why all the balls in the world where get you nowhere if you don't have some brains to back them up. I think we should also add in that Bush has taken the U.S. from a record surplus when he entered office to a record deficit (we owe China so much money it's sickening), abused the Presidential signing statement provisions to hell and back, ruined our educational system with his "No Child Allowed To Excel" program, shot down alternative energy proposals that would get us off of big oil right and left, allowed the stranglehold corporate lobbyists have on our government to become even worse especially with companies that engage in war-profiteering (Haliburton, anyone?), oil and the healthcare industries, destroyed our foreign relations with all but a handful of countries, and encouraged hate mongering of homosexuals and immigrants in our own country. He's ****ed this country up royally and anyone who thinks that he's a great or even a good President needs a full frontal lobotomy.

jag

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Hmmmmm....even though I agree with you.......Carter would have probably ****ed it up even worse....

I can tell you one thing, Carter wouldn't've lied in an attempt to connect it all to Iraq.
No one but a P.N.A.C. pawn could've "****ed it up" this well.

 

[Handsome Rob]

I take it you really believe this "random" poll. The poll is complete bs.

I believe that the results of the poll are the results of the poll. Whether they are absolutely accurate or not, no one knows--you would have poll the entire nation to get that (even then, you still couldn't claim 100% accuracy). That's why Gallup stresses the 95% confidence and +/- 3%. It's a fundamental part of sampling, and anyone with even the slightest grasp of statistics understands that.

But, I'm not inherently opposed to the idea that my own personal belief may not be reflective of what I think the majority of others' opinions are (or should be). Gallup is one of the most respected polling organizations in the world and is frequently utilized by all of the major news organizations. So, I wouldn't so quickly throw out the results and cry "rigged" or "B.S." simply because it didn't turn out the way I wanted it to.

 

[Kelly]

I can tell you one thing, Carter wouldn't've lied in an attempt to connect it all to Iraq.
No one but a P.N.A.C. pawn could've "****ed it up" this well.

Possibly, but that would only be speculation at this point, as it is speculation in my above post.

 

[Superman]

My first post of the year.


Anyway, I have to question any poll that has Bush among the "Most Admired Men".

 

[Docker2.0]

My first post of the year.


Anyway, I have to question any poll that has Bush among the "Most Admired Men".

Agreed! This poll could be "legit" but who did they question? A small republican town in Texas? Then of course Bush will be "admired" and for him to do it YEARS in a row is a bunch of crock!

 

[Obi-Ron]

Exactly.