I can sort of understand why many of us can look back on those days with rose-tinted glasses. The things Bush chose to do were shocking and unforgivable, but few considered him an existential threat to our republic itself.
The rise of Trumpism has sometimes looked like an existential threat to our republic itself.
After all, didn’t George W himself counsel us against the “soft bigotry of low expectations”? We owe it to the guy to be as hard on him as he deserves.
Republicans electing worse and worse presidents is clearly a conspiracy to make us remember previous ones more fondly. It also makes future terrible Republican candidates look good by comparison. (Weirdly, this doesn’t seem to help Democrats. They still get held to a completely different standard.)
Bush, to be fair, has exhibited more humanity since leaving office. Being away from Cheney, having fewer opportunities for bullying and more for reflection on the terrible things he was responsible for have made him a better person, if not a better president. I mean, he and his administration should have gone to jail, but…
I’m not one for “slippery slope” arguments, but conservative standards to seem to be on one. (Not to mention the Overton window shifts.) I fully expect we’ll manage to see a future Republican candidate - or president - who manages to be worse than Trump.
Since most people polled spent a LOT of time staring at TV, maybe the only hope is a retrospective political series, based on actual events. If it’s in front of viewers once a week, it might be harder to forget.
I’m a Democrat and hated Bush as President. He was a bad President that built a cabinet out of evil people. But as an ex-President, I like the guy. So I guess I would be one of the 58% with a favorable rating. I haven’t changed my opinion on his Presidency though.
To that effect, I still don’t think we’ve ever heard the real reasons for the Iraq invasion. My dad worked for a company which started receiving military contracts for it months before the WMD rabbit was pulled out of a hat. But, I can only imagine the biggest one was securing strategic oil interests in the region–not exactly the “war for oil” that people liked to scream, but close enough.
Yep, the thing to keep in mind is that Cory is a fiction writer and not a journalist. He didn’t bother to put any research into this post before making it. He jumped blindly to the assumption that people are speaking of Bush’s presidency. It’s always important to understand the nature of the question when looking at polls.
I’m sure it had almost everything to do with tying up loose ends for his father, former head of the CIA and up to his neck with installing Saddam in the first place, and the guy who went to war with Iraq as well (hell of a coincidence). That his war ended in a kind of truce must not have sat well with some sort of interest they had for that region. I don’t know if it was some kind of revenge or if they just thought they could rinse and repeat but I’d bet some sort of get rid of Saddam by any means was definitely a big part of that agenda.