[Professor S]

Originally Posted by TheGame

Hardly.

Explain.

There is plenty of proof that Bush is a liar, you just refuse to acknowlege it. He even lied about where he was on the morning of 9-11. And the reasons for the war were misleading. The rest of the world belived America because America was trustworthy at that point, but now we're not trustworthy.

I'd ask you to post your irrefutable proof, but that would take us far off topic. My thoughts are that if there was real proof and just heresay, Holder would be going after Bush and Cheney, and not a bunch of CIA agents and lawyers over waterboarding.

How did we ever get on Bush in the first place? Is he still president?

You're right about Ohio, I got the 2000 and 2004 elections confused. However you're wrong about bush winning by the largest amount of actual votes in history. He won my 3 million votes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_2004

Regan won by 7.5 million votes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1980

Obama won by 10 million votes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_2008

Clinton won by 7 million in 96, and by 5 million in 92, old bush won by 6 million in 1988, Regan won by 15 million in 84... I could go on and on.

I was sure on that, so thanks for the clarification. I concede the point. I do lknow that he was the first President to win by a 50%+ majority in a long time, though.

Bush wasn't as loved as you might think he was. For a guy who served 8 years, he BARELY got approved for his office. His two terms margin combined is lower then anyone in the last 2 decades. Jimmy Carter is the only president Bush is compareable to.

I never said he was the most loved, I said he won the argument. I'm not even a fan of him as a president, everything considered. I simply refuse to acknowledge that he is the original Mr Satan.

Also, for a little perspective, Bill Clinton was a popular president, but never even won a majority of votes in either of his elections. And even as popular as he was, his progressive polices were soundly defeated in the beginning of his first term. Afterwards, he became very centrist because thats where the votes are.

I think progressives are the ones who are hurting his approval rating now. When election time rolls around he's still going to get their votes, however.

No, progressives aren't the ones really hurting him, centrists are, and thats why he hasn't acted and tried to push things through. Think logically for one second: Why would he be dragging his feet on progressive issues if it were the progressives that were hurting him? It makes no sense.